Rookie Lawyer's Rants

The World Needs Us: A Lawyer’s Delusionary Account

2011-03-15T08:53:00.003Z

I often fantasise about blowing up the PHCN office – to make a political statement of sorts. You see, my I better pass my neighbour generating set is sometimes as undependable as PHCN. Every time mosquitoes begin to terrorise me, I would indulge in elaborate plans to retaliate MEND-style. Sadly, in the stereotypical Yoruba way, I never really get through the logistics and stop at grumbling and mouthing the worst curses and insults I can think of. These days, I also manage to throw in righteous thoughts of using my power to #Select in April, which is far easier than learning how to make bombs. I think I am also worried that I may have Mutallab’s luck. Jail is a bad place – no coffee or ice-cream.

Upon reflection, I am inclined to admit that this – my self-indulgent arsonist fantasies - is one of pressing reasons why lawyers and the legal system will outlive the earth. In addition to making distinctions between ‘contract splitting’ and ‘contract inflation’, the world needs lawyers to protect itself from the ‘desperate wickedness’ of the human mind.

Lawyer-lynching is fashionable these days. People make awful lawyer jokes, bait lawyers and make derogatory comments about our noble profession. Far from mere jealousy, I think these mortals have a severe love-hate thing with us. Despite what they say, these ‘ordinary’ people love the idea of a distinct profession that pulls off an awkward uniform rather elegantly. It is like the perverse pleasure the British ‘commoner’ must feel while paying taxes to keep royalty’s lifestyle luxurious. Nigerians, more especially, love the idea of being ‘connected’ and the legal profession offers an easier route than blue blood.

These are interesting times for the Nigerian judiciary. Cynicism has now become acceptable. Upon deeper scrutiny, however I realise that people still love the idea of a noble Solomon, a righter of wrongs, the wise arbiter who knows all. More so, they like the idea of having a judge listen to them as they tell how devious the ‘other party’ is. It is like seeing a physiologist without having to admit the existence of serious emotional issues. They love the attention they get when the judge writes down their words. They also really like the Millionaire Nigeria-like ‘hot seat’ feeling they get during cross examination.

Nollywood needs the law to get away with lines as ‘I will take you to court’, which comes with the mandatory dramatic slap on the table. Court scenes have also been known to take a fair lengthy of time which could help push a thirty-minute video film to ‘part 2’. Lawyers of course, being the pious lot that we are, have not sent any bills to the industry at this time.

No ‘industry’ loves the law as legislators, though. Since they are supposed to make laws, lawyers justify the allowances our lawmakers pay to themselves. Legislators also carefully write the law in unclear language and create convoluted legal procedures so that lawyers get to challenge these in court, which leads to more laws, and more work. It is a sham, really.

The media needs lawyers. Only statisticians will be able to tell us how many cover pages the hardworking Mr. Keyamo, the illustrious Mr. Falana or the much loved Gani must have helped sell. Lawyers provide the activism or controversy that keeps the newspaper industry thriving. Further, as long as newspapers print headlines with misinterpreted Wikileaks cables, people will sue or at least threaten to. We need lawyers for these cases.

I am sorry to disappoint the supporters of the beautiful first lady but the thing is ‘everyone will die’ – eventually, at least. So, as morbid as it sounds, lawyers are helpful in making this ‘situation’ smoother by writing wills.

Despite the many perils that surround the legal profession at this time, I am glad to realise that I didn’t choose the wrong profession. Law will be around forever.

Let’s Kill the Internet

2011-01-26T07:24:00.000Z

The legal profession is in peril – again. This time, it is the internet’s fault. Those glorious days of old when clients were satisfied with conceited mumblings of incoherent Latin phrases are slipping away. Lawyers no longer enjoy the thrill of being paid for thumbing through impressive heavy leather bound volumes while their clients nervously wait. Clients are getting to know too much than it is healthy of our noble profession.

We must never forget that law practice is sacred. While not yet proven, my research leans towards evidence that God may have created lawyers as the special specie destined to get paid for helping people and saving lives. Clearly, this position is not for everyone. Having realised the concept of free will and the tendency of humans to long for loftier callings (far above their status), the Nigerian Law School was established to help the creator keep the bloodline pure. Only those divinely called can withstand the annoyance of wearing uniforms for an extra year in order to build a career to wear more uniforms. This acts as a buffer between us and the rest of humanity.

Unfortunately, as the Original Sin, humanity seems poised to destroy this perfect plan this through the internet. People are increasingly becoming aware of the power of Google and the ridiculousness of paying someone else for a legal opinion that any six year old can prepare from an online search. Even worse, everything from court judgments to legal dictionaries has become easily accessible. This has allowed some unscrupulous ‘elements’ to put up templates of agreements online so that mere mortals can almost prepare a rough draft of legal documents. Horror of horrors: a few weeks ago, some misguided enterprising Nigerian, Zubair Abubakar, launched a free Blackberry application for the Nigerian Constitution. Apparently, everyone can get access to the Constitution and even know their rights without having to speak to the divinely ordained sect. Soon, someone might get it into their heads to create another application for the Electoral Act. It is shameful.

The world is forgetting the loveable, helpful otherwise indispensable lawyer. Our egos are being ignored rather than massaged. People are starting to question our rights to charge for what can be found on Wikipedia. Some are even becoming aware of their vocal chords and resisting our entitlement to speak on their behalf to a judge. This is getting really scary.

Things are getting out of control. Some lawyers, who I think may have sold their souls, are even aiding the process that makes the noble path plebeian. The profession as a body must stand against this. We should no longer lose the regal rigour that comes from spending hours looking up court judgments and precedents to Ctrl + F.

Lawyers must henceforth spurn the internet or anything connected to it. All true members of the legal elite must begin by rejecting search engines for research. We must remember - Google is for commoners! We must refuse further attempts to digitalise the letter of the law or court judgments. We must go back to the days when incoherent Latin was lawyer-speak and agreements could not be read without the aid of a (paper) Latin-English dictionary. The only concessions we can make with the internet is Facebook – which can be a useful tool for boring meetings.

We hope that someday we will stop this trend. We will regain our pride and go back to the time when people marvelled at the privilege of being around black robes and were content to touch our uniforms. This is a call to arms. Remember, the more confused and ignorant the clients are the more money we make – which of course, is the original plan.

Fair Elections Are Bad for Business*

2011-01-19T13:13:00.000Z

I like the Jewish traditional year of jubilee. My Aluta continua and Awoist-socialist leanings like the idea of freed slaves and forgiven debts at the end of seven cycles of Sabbatical years. It is a celebratory year of wealth and prosperity. For the Nigerian Bar, our celebration comes in four year cycles during the elections. During these periods, lawyers finally get a chance at helpings of the national cake through politicians who consider ‘graceful defeat’ an oxymoron. Since 1999, the legal community has provided this social service to ensure that funds circulate in the economy. We also keep thieving politicians alive since it provides an opportunity to share what they could choke on while trying to ‘swallow it alone’.

It has worked well. Nigerians have come to accept rigged elections without breaking into a sweat. We proudly tell of our rich history of voters’ apathy and refer to years of electoral malpractices as evidence of the resilient Naija spirit.

From what I see, Professor Attahiru Jega and his barely bearable INEC registration videos want to upturn precedent. The distinguished professor seems intent on wiping away our history, which from my paranoid lawyer lens, would also irreparably harm the world’s noblest profession.

Any true wig knows that the beauty of advocacy (synonym for ‘lawyer’s prattle’) lies in long drawn irrelevant disputes. Fair elections could reduce electoral petitions and therefore ruin the opportunities to grow oratory prowess. Even electoral tribunals serve their purpose – hardened insomniacs have found relief during these sessions.

Chaotic elections keep lawyers relevant. Keeping with the presumption of innocence, lawyers play knights in black robe to ensure peace and security in the middle of snatched ballot boxes and party chieftains with stolen votes under their agbadas. We like rigged elections and unscrupulous electoral processes. These justify overpriced legal fees. We like it.

Fair elections are not newsworthy. INEC must be a little oblivious or selfish as its aims would destroy the newspaper industry and lead to the loss of jobs. Worse, if Nigeria begins the fifth republic with well-intentioned leaders, newspapers would lose additional income. Editorial pages are unskilled in recognising leaders who actually did their jobs. Papers won’t be able to complain against injustice or corruption or whatever bad news fills the front pages these days. Few people would buy papers that fail to provide self-validation from feeding off the misery of others.

Another dangerous development is the potential for an ‘overzealous’ legislative arm. Fairly elected lawmakers could take their work too seriously and actually make laws that have nothing to do with budgets. Who knows – they may even stop throwing chairs! The Nigerian bar has thrived on the existence of laws made when Lord Lugard was thinking through a name for Nigeria. Law has stayed the same – and we like it that way. No tattered wig would want to now worry about having to keep up with the law. Consequently lawyers must come together to fight against any semblance of sanity.

This business about fair elections was not reasoned through. We must yet realise that it is unfair to hold the distinguished professor to our noble standards - how much can a mere mortal understand? The most appropriate prayer for Professor Attahiru Jega may be that of another Jew – ‘MiLords, forgive him for he knows not what he does’.

Voters’ registration runs between 15^th and 29^th January 2011. Please register in order to vote in May. We must protect our right to choose.

R is for Register #RSVP

*Rookie lawyer offers fictitious mindless and indulgent rants about the legal profession. She does not reflect the true position of law practice.

Just in case you come here between 15th and 29th January

2011-01-15T22:21:00.002Z

... and are Nigerian or know Nigerians in Nigeria

Registration for the 2011 elections are probably going to be tough, annoying and often inefficient.

But we must register to vote any ways - not because we want to 'help' Nigeria or pay some altruistic goody two shoes bills. We must register because we need leader who know that we voted them in. We need a Sword of Damocles hanging over their heads (our votes) threatening them to do right OR ELSE we'll de-elect them in 2015.

Your vote is insurance. It is power to determine whether we will get electricity, water, good roads - basic stuff that even Ghana enjoys.

Please, register to vote. Tell others too.

The R in RSVP.

Yet another Tedious New Year Rant

2011-01-11T15:33:00.002Z

I like the delusion of a new year. It is a mental bridge that assures me of an ability to do things differently without having to work too hard. In the Naija ‘E go better’ spirit, I started the year in church, steely proclaiming the final seconds of the year done and embracing the goodness of the new. Like I did for most of the years of my life, I also created a mental list of things that will automatically change in 2011. Unlike those years, I have also penned them with the flourish of experiences from my tedious legal briefs and Facebook notes.

My first resolution is to ignore anything that would destroy my illusions of grandeur. That has started of nicely since I intend to share my tedious definitions of ‘being a better person’ with anyone who wants to read it. The next step is to appear in the Supreme Court by myself. The only hindrance I foresee is convincing any reasonable senior or client to allow me on this egoistic rampage. I have considered options as poisoning Big Oga, Posh Tall, Plain Short, Ghandi and basically everyone in the upper rungs of the ladder till I am the only one left but I think that might be too obvious. I am open to any other suggestions in reaching this goal.

I will be a ‘sweeter ‘Rookie. Playing tough, hardworking or a female Keyamo wannabe is Abacha-era old and won’t make you president. I am therefore looking at another model – a harmless-looking female Goodluck Jonathan in a black robe and wig. I am also considering a calm Ayo Obe and an Abike Dabiri mix. Just so I don’t become underrated and underpaid as the Super Falcons, I’ll balance my sweetness with brownnosing my way into a pay raise. Nothing will be beneath me – not even the Minister of State for Information, Labaran Maku. I will consistently thank the court for bringing justice to West Africa and the clients for helping me pay my Law School debt. Within the firm, I will gush in awe at the senior partner’s black tie as I compliment his eye for colour. I will wonder aloud about his excellent taste as I marvel at his green stripped bowtie. Hopefully, he will soon start to notice my ‘perceptive personality’ and ignore the fact that I hardly do any work.

To add some depth to the sweeter 2011 version of Rookie, I will start wearing oversized glasses to court., never mind my 20-20 vision. While research has not shown a link between glasses and brilliance; Gani Fawehinmi, Rotimi Williams and Femi Falana have assured me of the link to oratory prowess. Judges are mostly human so they’ll probably assume some relationship with smartness and whatever comes out of my mouth.

I will use Facebook less and concentrate more on Spider Solitaire during the day. In the false camaraderie that follows the Christmas parties, I added a couple of my colleagues as ‘friends’. Friends know when you gossip or use employer time to do non-employer stuff which is bad for ‘business’ or my pay raise aspirations. To balance the limitations of Facebook, I will delegate more – which really means dumping all the work on the poor juniors who just got out of law school. I will be nicer to the juniors though so that they give better work and won’t murmur when I steal their credit.

I’ll try to make my affidavits for extension of time more believable. I will ditch the over-recycled story about one of my colleagues who left the firm with the client’s file and switch to more interesting ones ending with how I lost it after I heard about a bomb threat. I will also vote during the elections. Far from a patriotic zeal for a better Nigeria, I realise that I can do with some first-hand experience for the flood of election petitions that will come afterwards.

I hope 2011 will be a better year, near-believable elections and more peace than the last year.

*P.S:

I think I am back - See it first on THISDAY LAWYER every Tuesday.

2010-10-24T20:13:00.002+01:00

Means what it says on the tin :)

Three Weeks.Yay!

2010-08-20T23:04:00.001+01:00

Finally, I get time off - so does this blog. Next post is in three weeks!
Cheers

Note to Militants: Kidnapping Lawyers is Bad for Business *

2010-08-10T12:24:00.005+01:00

Nigerians were relieved when the abducted journalists were released a few weeks ago right after we played the ‘Nigeria does not negotiate with terrorists’ card. Yes, ‘Nigerians’ includes those poor attorneys whose litigious fantasies were shattered by the impatient and apparently unprofessional kidnappers. *Tut-tut* True hostage-takers would have exercised a little more restraint before letting their hostages go so easily. If they had tarried a while, we, the hardworking lawyers, would have had sufficient time to file our papers, suing everyone from the President to the governor of the ‘hostage-state’ and the ‘kidnappers at large’ for the psychological trauma caused by the incidents and the deplorable condition of security in Nigeria which infringed on our fundamental right to life.
The saving grace of their sloppy activities is that they had some insight to keep away from ‘stealing’ legal practitioners. Lawyers are anathema to any successful kidnapping ‘business’ – they will make awful kidnap victims.
No one will pay a kobo as ransom for any lawyer. The world has too many unwanted lawyers so that the kidnappers will be stuck with redundant disposable goods. In fact, people will probably celebrate the idea of losing lawyers without suffering through the nuisance of killing them. I also suspect that a group of ‘Aggrieved Former Clients of Lawyers’ will probably rustle donations to pay the kidnappers to keep the lawyers. Then again, lawyers are too cheap to pay their own ransom. Instead, we will probably draw up a bill of charges for the time spent in captivity.
The legal profession is already bound by so many codes, rules of etiquette and is so highly regulated that the hassle of abduction will be more comfortable than the cutthroat competition we face every day. We will probably find the jungle much more relaxing than law factory. This will place too much stress on the kidnappers who will be constrained to find other locations for their activities.
Lawyers and kidnappers are star-crossed. Kidnappers usually abduct people to bring attention to a worthy cause - it is the oldest technique used by freedom fighters and terrorists. Lawyers on the other hand, cannot bear to share attention with mere mortals, gun-toting militants or not. We love to be the centre of attention so that we will monopolise the post-abduction publicity and no one will even remember the kidnappers’ name or goals. Kidnappers don’t want that.
Kidnappers will find lawyers and their combative verbal skills particularly troublesome. Imagine a militant with a pretty heavy AK-47 in hand, probably a little nervous, also having to deal with a victim who cannot keep her mouth shut – Kidnapper: ‘Eh, move dia! Bristling lawyer: ‘Why? What is your locus standi to ask me to move? I’ll rather stay with here in compliance with the precedent you had earlier set’.
The benefits of kidnapping lawyers far outweigh the inconvenience. Lawyers have a significant dose of sartorial diva pretentions – who wants a victim that insists on a three-piece suit before stepping out? Lawyers will probably ask to review written demands for their own ransom and then, hold up the process by inserting all the archaic language they can muster.
Results of high level research (seriously, I saw it on some high-sounding blog on the internet!) has shown that lawyers have suicidal tendencies due to the long hours we work. This means that the hostage takers will probably chew on more than they can swallow – they have to watch over an irritable lawyer, ensure that the victim doesn’t die on their watch since dead victims are pretty inconvenient to dispose off.
Having the government at you is bad enough. Lawyers will be overkill – they get to sue you at no cost. At the end of the day, the kidnappers will probably let the lawyers go for free in order to get away from us.
Seriously, kidnapping lawyers is bad for business.

* Kidnapping is a dreadful crime. Rookie’s Rants does not find this dangerous activity amusing.

Legislative Syndrome

2010-07-27T11:54:00.004+01:00

Like every good rule-picking, egotistic litigator, I love to whine and complain. One of my favourite gripping topics - outside the politics and Groveller’s antics at Lagbaja, Tamedun & Co., the eccentric clients who fail to realise my awesomeness, annoying adjournments, etc - is the Nigerian Legislature. I admit that any couch commentator or worthy roadside newspaper reader would agree that our lawmakers are particularly easy prey with issues from chair throwing to child brides. However, as much as I gripe, I still can’t get past fantasising on splurging on a fraction of their allowances. I think it is the ‘Lawmaker Syndrome’ – a paradoxical psychological phenomenon where a citizen falls in lust with the non-law items lawmakers make, in the light of the dangers the lawmakers pose.

Perhaps, it also has something to do with homonymic strife. Lawyers and lawmakers share the same first name – law. You have to step into our shoes to appreciate our perspective and pain. Lawyers, not legislators do time in the university and Law School. We have to wear uniforms. Lawyers are the ones stuck in a grave of subservience and are condemned to eternal scraping and bowing to anyone who was called to the bar a second before they were called. We are forever subject to worship of the judiciary, grovelling before seniors and all the perils of a ‘conservative profession’. We do all these for zero ‘hardship allowances’.

Lawmakers here have it too easy. Our Constitution merely requires that they be ‘educated’ up to secondary school level – nothing says they even have to pass their exams! They get wardrobe allowance and yet, they get to complain about their meagre millions paid as salaries and other allowances, while we, the hardworking, underpaid ministers in the temple of justice, slave away doing good in the name of the law.

Despite our goodness and kindness, it becomes ever increasingly difficult not to resent lawmakers for their power to make laws. In the first place, letting non-learned mere mortals make laws comes to casting pearls before swine. Lawmakers cannot pretend to understand Latin. They cannot appreciate the beauty of archaic and verbose language. Clearly, the fine art of repetition, needlessly ambiguous terms, among other learned tools of the trade, will be lost on these people. Were the legislative houses filled with lawyers, we would be out of trees due to the many pages required to contain merely the preambles of the laws. Lawmakers are unskilled - one needs a good dose of irony and a straight ‘lawyer-face’ honed from litigation experience to insist that ‘financial autonomy’ of the legislature is more important than electoral reforms.

You cannot grasp the pains lawyers go through everyday, working with laws made by these people. Many lawyers continue to strain their inventive powers to make laws by interpreting them to no avail. In law world, creating laws comes second only to delivering judgments and way before a thirty-minute opportunity to address the Supreme Court (and we know how we lawyers love the sound of our voice).

I am usually optimistic – you need a good dose of sanguinity to initiate an action in courts while believing that ‘justice’ will be done in your lifetime. However, some things are just not meant to be.
Eternal friendship between lawyers and lawmakers is one of them. ):

What is good hair?

2010-07-20T09:56:00.002+01:00

Great video @ The Guardian

Why Law – and Lawyers – Exist

2010-07-13T17:37:00.001+01:00

Beneath my ‘profound humility’, lies my inner Plato’s Socrates – I like to question the obvious magnificence of the legal profession to remind myself of my good fortune to have ‘been chosen’ to be a lawyer. Questions like – why does law exist? How would the world exist without us? Why do we continue to withstand the lack of appreciation and worship of this noble vocation? What if someone took Shakespeare seriously and did kill all the lawyers (aka what if the apocalypse happened?)

Yes, I often worry my deeply sensitive, altruistic self about these things.

Laws exist as the more reliable and conservative alternative to Facebook-powered public opinion for the determination of right and wrong. So, rather than having to rely on comments on his Facebook page to decide on the fate of the Nigerian Football Federation, Mr. President would simply follow the FIFA statutes Nigeria had acceded to before it became a member. Laws also mean that despite my intense love for ice-cream, I have to pay rather than steal it from Ice-cream Factory.

The legal system ensures that when people steal from the public purse, their ‘detractors’ have an excuse to put them in jail, hound them or at least, induce them into doubting their sexuality a la Alamieyeseigha. It also means that we must assume innocence until proof of guilt or until the Police beats the guilt out of its suspects.

Lawyers are the most important of these all. We are connected to law in the way doctors are to medicine – a set of people hoard the right way to use an essential commodity and then make a living out of that concealed knowledge. We get away with it because humans generally love the idea of a hero and demigods – someone to love and blame for our woes. It is older than Hercules, Zik or Mandela. Lawyers fill that role – we help the helpless and take the blame for the worries of the world.

Lawyers help run the legal system. However unbelievable it may sound, those noble and fearless judges who help uphold the law and right the wrongs etc, were once lawyers.

In life, things do not always work as planned. Hugo Chavez has shown that Facebook and Twitter are sometimes more excitingly democratic and ‘grassroots conscious’ substitutes. Militants storm Abuja to demand for their guns in the same way I fantasise about asking for a salary increase. Laws – or the making of them –provide an excuse for legislators to ask for a pay raise, barely one year after rejecting the proposed increase of the national minimum wage.

Law and the legal system are often ignored – like the time the former President’s leave of absence was staunchly supported by ‘the cabal’, and the fact that a paedophiliac continues to get paid to make laws. The system also sometimes seems like a farce – like when the chief of police got a slap on the wrists for an offence that places people on ‘awaiting trial’ for a decade. The US got away with Iran and snubbing the UN while Nigeria played nice by handing over Bakassi because the ICJ said so. Celebrities get fined for manslaughter and litigation sounds like a scary synonym for years of paper-pushing.

Despite these ‘aberrations’, some of law is better than none of it. Thieving politicians sometimes go to jail, excessive legislators sometimes resign in shame and the navy gets to pay up for its undisciplined ratings.

2010-07-13T17:37:00.000+01:00

Yes, I often worry my deeply sensitive, altruistic self about these things.

Lawyers help run the legal system. However unbelievable it may sound, those noble and fearless judges who help uphold the law and right the wrongs etc, were once lawyers.

Why there is Plenty in a Name (?)

2010-07-07T12:00:00.002+01:00

God's Gift Achiuwa @ Erie Community College

What's in a Name?

2010-07-06T11:51:00.004+01:00

Dear Diary, this week starts on a bad note. Lagbaja, Tamedun & Co. is considering some restructuring within the firm that I, in my precocious infinite wisdom, already realise will amount to no good.

No, unlike the Football Federation, we have not been sacked and (I hope) no such thoughts exist. This is a fate worse than that. Yours truly, along with my fellow lower minions will now be referred to as ‘fee earners’ rather the more preferably pretentious ‘junior associates’. I realise that worse things could happen but this comes immediately after a legal apocalypse. This will undoubtedly result in trying to fix a tool that is not broken.

While I do not particularly adore the ‘junior’ in ‘junior associates’, I find it way more endurable than the newly introduced ‘fee earner’. There is something wrong about having a job labelled ‘fee earner’ that immediately makes you innately inferior to everyone else. ‘Everyone else’, of course, does not include interns and NYSC lawyers, who are strictly, microorganisms beneath the law ladder, objects rarely seen and only felt when necessary in their coffee making and photocopying capacities.

Apparently, Big Oga is the last to realise that ‘fee earner’ is a dirty word. It diminishes the dignity in the noble legal profession. Even though we all understand that law practice is a business, where salaries have to be paid from the services rendered, somewhere inside of us, we strongly hold on the knight-like quality of the quintessential advocate. We like to be thought of as gallant Joan D’Arcs in the gracious pursuit of righteousness.

This attempted change will undoubtedly affect the quality of my work. Until recently, I have learnt to hold my own and get away with pretending to be the smart professional associate by wearing Ghandi-like glasses to meetings. In fact, whenever I need to introduce myself, I quickly mumble past the ‘junior’ bit so most clients are clueless as to my actual position in the firm. With an expression as ‘fee earner’, there is little I can do to sound important any more ('earner' just does not sound right). Already, the ‘junior associate’ term mentally turns me to a bumbling mess whenever I actually have to report to Posh-tall in her office. Despite my near-smartness, I always get my facts wrong became I am overawed by the difference between my position and that of a partner. Emphasising my smallness will lead to no good.

The firm should know better. By now, one would think that every Nigerian has grasped the ‘power’ in one’s names. A name can make you President and a inappropriately chosen name or one with the wrong sounding syllables as ‘mu-mu’, ‘ita’, have been shown to lead to trouble.

I am torn in between declaring a fast to pray against this great sadness and finding a voodoo doll for Big Oga to perfectly express my discontent.

Sometimes, I get feedback from Rookie's Rants...

2010-07-01T17:50:00.006+01:00

and I usually find them really nice, irrespective of whether it knocks my logic or takes me seriously.

Olayemi F. Olushola knocks the piece on in-house lawyers:

This is a reaction to the above subject published in the This Day Lawyer section of This Day newspaper dated the 29th of June 2010.
As I read your publication, I became sick. It is very obvious to me that your publication comes from a very myopic grasp of the knowledge and workings of Law. In my opinion, you should have carried out a research at least on the internet before proceeding on a national daily. Your publication is definitely not researched and therefore falls short of the standard of an article.

The intention of this article is not only to disabuse the minds of the public who read the above captioned publication, but also to enlighten the public on the roles/functions of the in-house lawyer/counsel. In other words, who is the In-house Lawyer?

According to Black’s Law Dictionary, “A lawyer is a person learned in the Law, as an attorney, counsel or solicitor; a person licensed to practice Law”. The law on the other hand is the system of rules of conduct established by the sovereign government of a society to correct wrongs, maintain the stability of political and social authority and deliver justice. Working as a lawyer involves the practical application of abstract legal theories and knowledge to solve specific individualized problems.

In Nigeria, once you have passed the requirement of the Council of Legal Education, which consist of having your Bachelor of Law Degree and qualifying in the Nigerian Law School, you will be enrolled into the Supreme Court of Nigeria as a Barrister and Solicitor. The name and qualification cannot be taken away from you unless you are guilty of falling fowl of the Rules of Professional conduct. Nothing stops a lawyer who is in a salaried employment to go to court to defend pro bono, for charity, family or if he is sued. This is provided for in the Legal Practitioners Act.

In-house Lawyers comprise of the Lawyers in the government parastatals, the corporate organisations and nongovernmental organisations. Their primary role is to serve as Legal Advisers. In corporate organizations for example, lawyers are there to help the company achieve their goals. The lawyers in this field of practice require a much wider set of skills. At this juncture, let me state here that once you have been called to the Nigerian Bar, you are opened to various career paths, which includes but certainly not limited to private practice, corporate organisations, government parastatals, nongovernmental organisations and the Bench. These practitioners then apply their acquired legal knowledge and skills to solve the various legal issues peculiar to that concern/organisation. You can understand why the above captioned subject matter baffled me, it is understandable coming from a non lawyer, but when it is coming from an acclaimed lawyer, I am indeed taken aback.

The duties of an in-house lawyer in a corporate organisation are, but not limited to the following:

• Preparing and vetting of contracts agreements and other legal instruments.
• Serving in committees and offering legal advice in the company.
• Representing the company in court.
• Liaising with security agencies.
• Perfection of title deeds.
• Continuous research in updating of legal knowledge as it relates to particular fields.
• Liaising with the Police and courts on matters affecting the company.
• Giving legal appraisal of investment proposals, ensuring safety and security of investment from the legal perspective. Preparation and perfection of investment instruments e.g. mortgages, trust deeds, deeds of guarantee, indemnity, bonds, assignments etc.
• Vetting important correspondences initiated by the other departments within the company such as letters of dismissal of staff, repudiation of liability, offer of ex-gratia payment, offer and acceptance of contracts, taxation etc. Also vetting of advertisement in the national dailies and televisions to ensure compliance with Laws and Regulation.
• Filing of statutory returns with the Corporate Affairs Commission and relevant regulatory authorities.
• Preparation of Board and Annual General Meetings of the company.
• Recording of minutes at the Board and Annual General meetings. This therefore knocks out your assertion that these practitioners are overpaid. However, you are pardoned because obviously you are lay concerning this issue.

From the foregoing, it is apparent that without your training as a lawyer you can never carry out these functions and even that training is just the beginning, for these categories of practitioners you are expected to be up to date with working technology and relevance in Law.

Since moving in-house, I have not only advised on all kinds of legal matters, I have also found myself playing a very active role in broader strategy, for example I have had correspondences on agreements at international levels and also had engagements with the Securities and Exchange Commission and high regulatory authorities, plus I can boast of being IT literate with the latest technologies. All thanks to my chosen career path. I must state here that this is the very essence and the beauty of the Legal profession. Every career path is a noble and respectable career path and all lawyers in this field are reasonable and responsible citizens of the legal profession and Nigeria.

Finally, Instead of undermining the very essence of these practitioners who contribute immensely to the noble profession and to the overall benefit of Nigeria by ensuring less litigation and properly advising these companies of their legal obligations/responsibilities and which in turn show case these companies as responsible law abiding citizens, making them add value to the society towards the advancement of our great nation, these lawyers should be applauded. The choice to be a corporate Lawyer is a career path recognised in the Legal Practitioners Act, Rules of Professional conduct and even the Companies and Allied Matters Act!

'acclaimed lawyer'? Go Rookie, Go Rookie

In-house counsel... What are those?

2010-06-30T10:47:00.001+01:00

The life of a junior associate is mostly yawn material. Most of the excitement of a typical day is grovelling to the salary provider, backstabbing another associate as she grovels to the salary provider, gossiping about those grovelling and when the occasion demands, telling artful untruths. These many perils still come a far distance from that of the ‘in-house lawyer’.

‘In-house lawyers’, also derisively referred to as ‘legal secretaries’, a phrase that immediately evokes a bespectacled Pittman-trained typist; or the more generalised pompous sounding ‘in-house counsel;’ are law graduates and law school veterans who have ditched the proper practice of law for the overpaid corporate world.

The ‘in-house lawyer’ is in fact, a misnomer. ‘Real lawyers’ are those you see in the courts, dragging their robes, quasi toga style, like you’ll expect of royalty. ‘Real lawyers’ are also distinguished by their litigation prowess and adjournment-seeking skills. We take no prisoners. One easy way to tell a real lawyer from these pretenders is the way our voices are permanently set to the ‘high-pitch’ category (in order to share credit: I think that also has something to do with the fact that the microphones in the courts rarely work). Anyway, in-house lawyers also have rudimentary legal training so they have some limited right to the use of ‘lawyer’. A suitable analogy: real lawyers are like ‘presidents’ while in-house lawyers are ‘vice-presidents’. They both use the word ‘president’ but one does nothing but takes pictures and attend ceremonies on behalf of the other.

These poor souls are torn in between two worlds. They bear the burden of lawyering without any of the benefits that make Nigerian parents encourage their naive children to study law. After spending time in law school, undergoing the humiliation of the faceless penguin uniforms, pretending to listen while sitting through hours of classes, having to actually read tons of useless material, among other painful activities; they end up with a job that hides their strengthened virtues ‘under a bushel’. Their dignity and hard work is never recognised. For example, they never quite attain the glory of puffing while pretending to hate the wig and gown under the sweltering heat. Instead, they lose their lack of individuality in the corporate world as they blend into the army of mere commoners. Worse still, they daily contend with having to mix colours to wear after years of the easy and reliable monochrome.

In exchange for an over-priced salary (no, I am not really jealous), in-house lawyers will never get to say things like ‘objection, My Lord’, complete with the dramatic slam on the bar or with the right amount of spit, pronounce to an hapless witness - ‘I put it to you’. They will never enjoy the pleasure of being referred to as ‘Barrister X’ or if they like, ‘Lawyer Y’, as if the profession confers specialised honorifics that reminds all of our superiority. Their words will never be immortalised through the honourable judge’s pen. They will never sit through the drone that begins after the third hour of judgment-reading or fantasise about elevation to the bench. For the rest of their career-life, they will remain mere men, un-revered and un-awed.

Bits of legal training spurts once in a while as legal training cannot be fully tamed. ‘These people’, a hybrid of the fantastic and the mundane, try to convince their employers of their value. They struggle with the professionals by reviewing our agreements or making suggestions to our work but they only come off as meddlesome children, without the far reaching effects of a Kaita.

I ought to be thankful for me. There are far more horrible things than being a junior associate

Jabulani

2010-06-22T18:57:00.002+01:00

As Africa celebrates playing host to a series of ninety-minute leather kicking, law practice is doing its own sober, non-vuvuzela version. Lawyers have become more friendly and less grumpy. Obviously, this has more to do with less work and the fact that partners either look the other way or at a television screen when people leave the office before eight. It seems that we are all united or fighting hard to appear united by the World Cup. Everyone has caught the fever – Groveller and Ghandi bought those phones with cable sports channels and seem to have permanently attached the phones to their left palms for the past two weeks; the last two weekly meetings have been shorter since few lawyers are interested in sharing hypothetical legal issues that take hours of shouting and arguing with no solution.

People including less mortal lawyers, are unable to make three statements without alluding to football. The only person who does not seem to care about the World Cup is Grey Stripes – but I guess work drones don’t count for much. Even Prof. Nkechi, who does not like football, mentioned the fact that Africa’s bit of the World Cup was providing the locations and showing up with everything from the theme song to the Zakumi figurines from Latin America and Asia. At least, she noticed.
The most obvious thing is the way conversations, no matter how ‘innocuous’ ultimately lead to football. Someone could ask: ‘Did the court sit on time?’ and find a perfectly reasonable response in: ‘Oh yes. Like Argentina scored that goal’. Earlier today, Groveller comes to our pool office to raise some issues about a Statement of Defence, which Ghandi and I were working on. Ordinarily, Groveller would send an email or call to demand the ‘lower officers’ to appear before him. In response, Ghandi, straight face in place said: ‘Our defence is tight Sir. Even if the Claimants want to try a penalty, our papers are tighter than Serbia’s defence’. They both guffawed like drunken hyenas over a carcass left by an overfed lion.
(I am thinking: *Just shoot me! Any more football jokes and my ears will fall off*)

The good thing about the whole increasingly annoying football stories is that lawyers are also less antagonistic at meetings and usually tense negotiations. I think the idea of common enemies - Argentina, Greece, Korea Republic – makes it easier to bond and make concessions. I have noticed that the best time to schedule meetings now are a maximum of one hour before the next match since the other side is much more willing to concede to your point than miss the next match.
Someone also put the World Cup fever in the air-conditioning at the courts. Ordinarily ferocious litigators now seem to leave their claws at home. I am in court for some pre-trial conference, while we wait for the judge to sit (His Lordship stood the matter down for a period which suspiciously coincided with the Portugal- Korea match). I sit two seats away from a lawyer who is more known for his theatrics rather than for his grasp of law. Last year, I heard him agree to an adjournment with another lawyer only to turn indignant when the other lawyer formally applied to the court for the same adjournment. He went on about how lawyers did not respect the time of the court and how he ‘was constrained to ask for costs’. The other lawyer looked torn between shock, worry for his learned friend’s psychiatric health and anger at being made a fool of. Anyway, that same theatrical lawyer was in court today, bowing and making jokes with his ‘learned friends’. He actually seemed to enjoy the court clerk’s obnoxious disagreement with which country ought to have won the USA-England fight and the predicted scores for Nigeria’s Thursday match.

Few care about Zakumi or the meaning of ‘Jabulani’. The World Cup however meets our (often false) sense of ‘togetherness’ - like the brotherhood of the legal profession. Then again, it provides an excuse to while away ninety minutes at arm-chair football analysis. That works for me.

Getting my Diary Back

2010-06-15T11:26:00.003+01:00

Nothing says ‘well trained Nigerian lawyer’ louder than a nice large and hefty diary. In fact, the only thing that beats brandishing ‘the diary’ in court is showing off a four feet stack of law reports for a three-minute application. In addition to the ordinarily date-keeping ‘facilities’ of diaries, I usually use mine to vent, rant and complain about the things I sometimes love about being a lawyer. While modesty forbids my saying so, I also keep my diary to serve as a reference tool to record the details of my un-fabulous life so that when I become President or someone important, I’ll write a biography and get people to pay me for what they could get free on reality TV.

I didn’t realise how much I had missed my diary until Hyde Rookie accidentally spilled coffee on Senior’s Blackberry after Senior threw a typical tantrum. I stood in shock as I watched my beloved coffee go down the phone! Then, Groveller told on me so that I had to fix the phone. That would not have happened if I had a venting outlet. Usually, my diary acts as a virtual couch, unwavering listener to my irrational rants and comforter in the wicked law world. So, in order to spare the world of the dangers posed by diary-less me, I have decided to bring Rookie’s diary up to speed.

Lagbaja Tamedun and Co. aka the salary provider is still much of the same, save for the interns from the Law School and Muktar’s ‘defection’ to an oil services company. He left the firm two months ago. We still miss him. Plain Short has also been away for the last four weeks. The official reason is a short MBA course for lawyers, one of those executives’ courses where they eat three course meals for tea. Lekki-British said she must have her eyes on Posh Tall’s job. I think she merely wanted the vacation she could not take last year – no one really learns anything at those courses.

Posh Tall on the other hand is ‘different’. She has started smiling, saying things like ‘please’, ‘thank you’ and everything un-Posh Tall. Lekki-British (official position: receptionist; volunteer position: the firm’s chief news-spreader) told me Posh Tall has started reading management books and is practising what she learnt. Last week, she complimented Ghandi on his red tie. Ghandi looked like he was unsure of whether she asked him to strangle himself with the tie.

Ghandi is as mischievous as ever. Yesterday, he put salt in Totally Together Chick’s tea. TTC took the first sip, made an appropriate ‘oh dear’ face, and in her classic annoying calmness, walked to the bathroom. Lesser mortals a.k.a. Rookie would have simply spat it out and later worried about apologising for the uncouthness of the spray-spit. Ghandi also tried wearing contacts for about two weeks until he caught some eye infection. Of course, I made the appropriate (chuckling) sounds – haha!
Besides Ghandi’s perils, Grey Stripes is wearing a knee brace. I hear he fell down the stairs (it was about 11 pm and the lights were out). Everyone is pretending to be nice with the dutiful ‘oh, sorry oh’, ‘eh ya’, while we all laugh and ‘mock his downfall’. Grey Stripes hasn’t changed from the kill joy he used to be. He still does not understand that ‘normal people’ come to work only for the strong pull of the salary and not for the love for the law.

Senior is still a pain in the neck (see above). She has also taken to bullying the new juniors which is the straw before the last one to break the camel’s back. There is only ONE set juniors below yours truly on the ladder i.e. only ONE small sect of minions, I can rule over. Senior deprives me of this joy since by the time she is done with them, they are quivering and do not even notice my derision at their ignorance. *Sniff*

I am appearing with Big Oga, Ghandi, Prof and some ‘nameless junior’ (power is so yum yum!) at the Court of Appeal tomorrow. It means staying late to review the file.
Why on earth did I study law?!!
P.S: Note that rant was contained in diary, rather than throwing something at the nameless junior.

Robin Hood in a Wig!

2010-06-01T22:02:00.003+01:00

Some impertinent bad belles may insinuate that politics and doggedness, rather than the ‘rule of law’ allowed Mr. Igbeke take his seat at the Senate. They may irreverently add that the court’s decision was hardly effective since the Senate got away with ignoring their Lordships for two weeks. It seemed that the Senate conceded when it pleased them to do so. These ignoramuses may then conclude with a feathers-ruffling question – did we really need to take three years worth of fillings fees, lawyer’s fees (undiscounted by actually having to listen to lawyers speak), appeal and all, just to ensure that the right person gets to spend one year at the Senate? In fewer words – ‘does law and the legal process matter’?

*Smsh* The simplest reason for the law is that a society that is burdened with an overzealous Police, bloodthirsty naval ratings, nit-picking LASTMA, selected politicians and predatory paedophilias, needs pre-agreed rules to function and protect it. The legal process ensures that those rules are enforced and do more than provide theoretical study materials for law students. Law is the protector of all from all. Deeper reasoning however, shows that law and the legal process are important without having to do anything else. Law simply exists because it does.

For one, the law justifies itself by birthing the hallowed legal profession. The legal profession (or more appropriately, ‘vocation’) is one filled with ministers who tend to Lady Justice and her nephew, Rule of Law. Law helps massage the egos of these chosen few and reassures them of their superiority over ordinary people. Law therefore, is entirely for society’s own good since one can hardly trust mere men to take care of themselves. Consequently, the legal process helps emphasise and remind everyone of how much they need our awesome selves. Better still, it allows us earn a living by saving the world and righting wrongs – like Robin Hood in a wig. (*Yes, I agree, ‘deeper reasoning’ is that complicated.*)

Many points acknowledge the fact that lawyers are essential to life in the way overpriced weaves are crucial for the over-processed hair of the Ultimate Lagos Chick. While the world may not be fortunate enough to get forty year old lawyers on the World Cup lists, they make do with one of ‘our own’ on the Federal Executive Council as the chief law officer. Our constituency is in power every time! More importantly, every bad guy knows from movie experience that the four magical words after getting caught is: I need my lawyer!

Despite the reasons to keep our feet away from the ground and scorn everyone, we are innately modest and acknowledge certain limits. We realise that we may not be as powerful as the former INEC Chairman who remained unfazed despite calls for the thing above his neck. Our judges however have the security of staying on the bench until they can hardly move their wrists.

Law also matters because it provides a logical excuse to carry out elections necessary to justify paying the legislators out of our taxes. Legislators of course, are those people who are officially paid to talk about making laws, sponsor bills to dictate the length of our skirts and sleeves, and ignore decisions of the Court of Appeal. Oh, sometimes, legislators apparently meet to discuss weighty issues such as their quarterly allowances.

Law is mostly like the United Nations – it helps us assume we live under one big happy umbrella and share the same goals until the USA decides it is strong enough to do justice by itself.

2010-05-25T16:33:00.003+01:00

Even our eerily good-fortuned President did not tempt fate by choosing a lawyer as his deputy. It simply would have been pushing his luck farther than the boundaries of his name.

Lawyers would make devious deputies and probably outdo every vice since 1960 for reasons inherently lawyerly – backstabbing, lying, cheating, usury and other regular stuff. It begins with the fact that we are natural leaders and are too good for anything else. Something in legal training makes us easily emerge as first and unsuitable for deputising. Ask Hilary Clinton – it was either the Presidency or Secretary of State. We shine for reasons that have less to do with our absurdly styled uniforms and the dead language we insist on speaking, than our sparking wit and wisdom. Shining Stars can’t deputise.

Anyone around during the last few months of the last republic heard enough of stories about the Rumble in the Rock. Governance between a lawyer and a non-lawyer President could turn out pretty worse. Everyone knows that the true test of lawyer-hood is litigation prowess and staunch determination to annihilate the ‘other’ even in the face of facts that defeat the need for a third party adjudicator. The crisis could outdo the weti-e of the Wild Wild West.

No true lawyer would stoop low to defer to a mere mortal who may not have even seen the inside of a law school auditorium or ever been called a ‘de-law’. The gerontocratic law profession will never allow peace to reign between us and a commoner in the corridors of power. Never! The power sector will have its 6,000 megawatts before that happens. In fact, the Distinguished Senator Yerima would marry an adult before we stoop that low.

The office of the Vice-President is in reality, a nameless spare tyre on the wheels of government. They smile and do nothing more. The only time they can act is by invoking the doctrine of necessity. Vice-Presidents are like children and junior law associates – they are meant to be seen and not heard. These qualities are incompatible with the status of the legal profession. No grown-up lawyer who earns his living from a time-honed affection for his vocal cords will fit into a job that basically entails nodding at the right times and representing the President at events he does not want to attend. We lawyers love to speak too much to live a life of listening to other people.

Only losers settle for second place. Lawyers are not losers. We are like gladiators who fight to the finish. A lawyer Vice-President would for instance, immediately review the Constitution and find some loophole and an interpretation to remove the irreverent and intruding President. The President would obviously be at a disadvantage here since judges, being originally lawyers, would take the side of their own.
Then again, the pool of potential lawyer-Vice-Presidents is probably limited as few legal practitioners are in the ruling party. The lawyers in politics are largely misguided for the real world since they seem to have taken notions of justice too seriously. *Smsh* Many lawyers in government seem to actually do their jobs which would make them ill fitted for a position that actually expects you to do nothing.

More importantly, I notice that the President has a particular fondness for the black robe (the traditional woko). The only reason why we can’t see the accompanying wig is because it is well hidden under his black hat. The President apparently is wiser than sharing the limelight with a person who has a right to a similar outfit. Doing and co with his deputy may give the latter ideas.

Good thinking, Mr. President. An architect is way safer!

Keep Off our Turf!

2010-05-18T18:05:00.002+01:00

Law School was tough – the lectures were long and boring; I actually had to read rather than cram; the person sitting next to me loved cigarettes but apparently thought mints were overrated; and horror of horrors: there was no decent ice-cream store near the school. Everything went wrong - it was really bad. The only thing that kept me up during those hard times was the thoughts of the rewards at the end of the tunnel.

Having grown up on reruns of American law offices on NTA, I knew Law offered everything to its adherents. With this knowledge, I quickly decided that the money lawyers made was worth the insane jealousy commoners felt towards them. The lawyers on the NTA soaps were pretty smart and revered – like Enahoro beneath a wig or a beardless Soyinka with a law degree. The soaps also assured me that lawyering was most of convincing twelve people of the innocence of their clients – easy like they did it. Never mind that I suffered a terrible stutter at that time, I knew that the law was the profession for me.

I had it well figured out. I would be a ‘good’ lawyer and rather than tow the Johnnie Cochran route, my skills would help win morally upright cases. Justice would be done while I reaped the truckload of money at the end of the law rainbow. For years at the university and Law School, I withstood the indignity of the facelessness of the penguin uniforms which we wore for lectures. After all, there was the guarantee of the sartorial splendour of the wig and gown. ‘Patience comes before reward’, I told myself. Had I known, I would have added a fair dose of good luck.

Whichever the case, I knew that I along with a few thousands would be distinctly learned and better than the rest of the world. The only things I didn’t really think through were the impracticalities of layering in the tropics and the sheer inconvenience of balancing a wig over weaves. Those were mundane and far from pressing in my brilliant mind. Instead, I used my ‘thinking time’ to worry about the how to manage the trust people would have in me and my expertise. I decided that I would work hard so as not to let them down – the perils of saving the world.

Like best laid plans and naturally aided by ‘the wicked ones’ (which are the rather more convenient culprits in our scuttled plans), real life turned out differently. Everything went wrong. Theory was so different from the legally themed soaps and an 8 – 6 job. Practice was before judges whose rulings sometimes depended on what they had for breakfast. The shock at the realities of law practice comes second only to what ‘non-progressive’ Edo State plebeian indigenes must have felt as they watched their ‘man of the people’ rub shoulders with the ‘traitors to democracy’ at his electoral reform rally.

Being a lawyer is far from what it says on the tin. I suggest that there should be a warning label on law faculties – ‘Law Practice Bears No Analogy with Ally McBeal’. While there is the general automatic conferment of erudition, dignity and distinction from mere mortals (oh well, amazing is easy!), law practice is not much more.

Worse still, our skills don’t count for much as pretentious hijackers seem to have stolen our roles. Nigerian lawmakers for one. Besides some Houses of Assembly that have consistently worn the wig and gown for ceremonial occasions, some Senators have now assumed our roles. They want the benefit without the burden!

Someone should tell them that lawyers, and no one else, get away with lying and using precedents to justify the rightness of our actions. Lawyers also have the sole discretion to use religion for our own gain. That is why we have incorporated oath-taking into the justice system to scare the witness into telling us what we want to hear. Unfortunately, one Senator has not only usurped our position but extended the use of precedents as grounds for legality of underage marriage. I think we should sue for theft of professional identity or something.

Law is strictly mine, well, I, along with a few thousands in Nigeria

Name it: We Sweat It

2010-05-04T18:10:00.003+01:00

Finding true love and happily ever after is pretty difficult in a world where prenuptials are negotiated as intensely as multimillion currency transactions or where aso-ebis cost more than the average family’s monthly income. Being perceived as a conceited, fashion faux pas on feet (really, black gown on black suits!) does not help your chances. My advice: don’t attempt to cross-breed, stay with your kind.

It is a dangerous world out there run by a conspiracy created by people who hate us simply because we are perfect. Relationships in non-law world have been skewered against legal training. They have so many alien concepts as trust, forbearance and forgiveness (yes, that includes forgoing your right of reply). Apparently, what makes us fantastic lawyers make us inept in a world of non-lawyers. A lawyer:non-lawyer ratio is hard work. Blame it on the conflict in values or the curse of genius.

Take our often unappreciated brilliance. Lawyers are trained to be smart in ways mere mortals cannot grasp. How else does one describe how we have convinced ourselves, the Supreme Court and its five wise men to ignore logic and the English dictionary to redefine ‘and’ as ‘or’? When you pull stunts like this and get away with speaking a dead language, reserve ‘learned-hood’ for your kind, conceit becomes you. Conceit does not however translate nicely with non-lawyers. In fact, people ignore delusions of grandeur except they are mouthed by a former military president with suspiciously abundant funds and willing sycophants who have convinced him that the world revolves around him.

Despite years of being right, we are unable to get past the innate need to persuade other people of our inherent rightness. Unwritten convention dictate that other lawyers allow us revel in the sound of our voices, while they politely await their turn. The initiated also knows that the real reason we have meetings is not to listen to the other side but to prove we are right again. Non-lawyers don’t get that and rudely interrupt our long winded sounds – one of the reasons that make ‘irreconcilable differences’ in divorces.

Lawyers have undeveloped trust genes. Law School trains us to suspect everything and trust no one. Besides our typo spotting prowess, we find discrepancies and danger lurking at every corner. Where we do not find them quickly enough, we create them. For example, while a non-lawyer cannot tell the difference between ‘I was at work all day’ and ‘I have been busy all day’, lawyers can read ten different meanings to each.

Words are everything. Non-lawyers may not understand us. Pillow talk between birds of a different feather could go like this:
Ignorant love-struck non-lawyer: I love you.
Love-struck professional lawyer: Is that without prejudice to my inclinations and leanings, and includes, without limitation, my appurtenant family; and excludes my corporeal and incorporeal hereditaments?
Only a lawyer will understand why we need to rewrite wedding vows for accuracy into three pages of verbosity.

Spending time with mortals to build relationships is incompatible with the status of a legal practitioner. Time is money and lawyers realise that. No true lawyer can send a friendly email or meet for drinks without mentally writing a bill for time spent.

We sweat the small stuff for a living. We fuss and nag and no one complains. Sometimes I wonder if the original word in the Biblical reference to a nagging wife shared the root words for ‘lawyer’. Lawyer revel in the small print. Often we manage to convince other people that two lines of barely legible print matter more than pages before. Other times, we just wear them out.

Aside: On Rookie’s Diary

2010-05-04T14:21:00.000+01:00

I probably don’t say it enough – law practice is not giggly fun. Real life law catches up on you like the way the General Hospital looks after watching back to back reruns of Grey’s Anatomy. So, I haven’t filled my diary in a while because talking about the many pages of documents I read or the motions I adopt in court is not exactly fun-worthy. So, instead, I have decided to indulge in ranting from my lowly perspective. Most of these rants are unserious. Some are not.

Law .. then Sometimes, Justice

2010-04-30T09:39:00.001+01:00

I have always liked the idea of playing Voltron (the defender of the universe) or a female Zoro (I like the idea of a sword). So when I finally got past the fact that studying law offered a rather narrow career path; I warmed up to it and took the second best option – saving the world. After all, government backed by law would ensure justice and save us all from the Hobbes’ world where life was brutish and short and who better to do the saving than my perfectly deluded self? I even took human rights classes and looked forward to rubbing shoulders with Gani, Ayo Obe or Shirin Ebadi (*hint hint*a Nobel prize). After a few ASUU strikes and mounting realisation that my friends in privately funded schools were going to be in Law School two years earlier and would inevitably become my ‘seniors’; I started seriously considering tax advisory or something pretentious enough to pay me to send my kids to private schools.
Still, I loved the idea of being a ‘minister in the temple of justice’ and convinced myself that my world saving ideals would work in corporate law where I would protect the poor defenceless tax-avoiding companies from the claws of the monstrous Federal Inland Revenue Service.
After two years in law practice and many more observing the courts and law makers, I think I have finally ‘gotten it’. Justice has as much to do with law as voting with the names on INEC’s certificates of return. Here is my analogy – as voting gives the ‘elected’ some semblance of legitimacy but has little to do with who is elected, so does law have little with being just. I think elections are held merely to allow governments spend money, wax poetic about the rule of law at international conferences and other things they like since everyone knows that the electoral body, rather than our measly votes has accounted for a large percentage of political offices in the past decade. Yet, life goes on and we live with an electoral body whose supporters are scorned as turncoats.
So, justice and law: law (in the general sense of judicial rightness) and laws (in the particular sense of rules in books) exist because they offer us some path to (what we assume to be) justice. Law tries to play the part and keeps Lady Justice’s company (hence the phrase ‘law and justice’). It seems to work since people keep paying taxes to fund legislators’ expenses and salaries of officers of a judicial system copied from a colonial system.
For most of the world, the connection between law and justice is like that between PHCN and electricity supply. Sometimes, it succeeds - like the time a big shot politician was convicted for fraud the same way yahoo yahoo boys get jailed for 419 and everyone sniggered about how the mighty had fallen. Law was also justice when electoral returns were upturned by the courts and the publicly perceived winner was made governor. People also loved the law when the Navy was told to pay up for doing what was perfectly acceptable ten years ago. Other times, law and the laws fail to catch up – like selective prosecution or the way no one catches political officers when they dip their hands in tax funded cookie jars.
Perhaps, the problem with justice is law. Law is pretentious. The rule against hearsay, for instance, means we cannot do anything about the ‘cabal’ with bad intentions even though the Minister of Information told us so; and the reasonable doubt rule in a world where we have been told to believe that our president is well enough to drink tea but not a five minute speech to the nation.
I have come to live with the fact that justice sometimes depends on the more expensive lawyer or one who can drum up the most technicalities. I take what I can of what law offers. Like the biblical solicitous rich man who was content to keep all the non-fiscal commandments but reluctant to sell his possessions, I live with justice coated law. This coat allows the luxury of being goody two shoes while we turn a blind eye to justice that has nothing to do with us. We hold on to a bunch of rules for predictability in commercial transactions and save ourselves from the fuss the late Gani would surely have made about their constitutionality.
Thinking through it, law offers a preferable second best. Justice is messy and complicated in the ‘an eye for an eye’ way that assumes the eye-remover has an eye or cares about it. Then again, who needs justice when lawyers get paid for law?

It's Law Practice, Silly

2010-04-14T12:36:00.001+01:00

Going to Law School was one of the best decisions I ever took. Although it was really pretend-choice since my decision was between taking a picture with a wig and gown at Law School graduation and destroying my mom’s dreams of finally having a lawyer in her family. Thankfully, lawyering has turned out to be enjoyable... ok, I exaggerate a little – sometimes enjoyable.

Law practice is largely easy. It is undemanding and forgives a multitude of errors. Lawyers are actually encouraged to make mistakes - it is law ‘practice’, silly! You can make as many amendments to your processes as you like. I have read amendments of Statements of Claim and witnesses’ statement on oath that are unrecognisable from the original claim and no one makes a fuss about it. Better still, since an amendment is deemed backdated, the other party cannot protest an outright lie. Law offers full redemption like Mrs. Tiger Woods.

The best thing about zero expectations of perfection is that it is really hard to go wrong. It’s like a marksman who chooses his target after hitting it. We get to take our time with everything too. Experienced litigators, for instance, tend to take time at trial since no one expects them to get it right the first time. In any case, we realise that perfection at trial may put appellate courts out of business – no one wants that. It probably smacks of judicial usurpation or some grandiose term.

Lawyers use precedents – we do not reinvent the wheel. Innovation is in fact, frowned upon. They are good for everybody: lawyers are unencumbered by the mental exhaustion of individual thinking, the courts are easily persuaded to interpret a provision like it was done elsewhere. Life goes on without the annoying flutter of brain activity.

The law is a very loyal profession. It lionises its veterans for simply existing. In fact, the only thing better than law practice is the Nigerian civil service, ministerial appointments and other political offices. You don’t to do anything to be respected. You can as well play dead while the years pile on. Of course, once in while you might do something close to inviting Jay Z to commission boreholes which cost less than you paid Jay Z’s entourage but at least, you get your name in the papers for it. The trick is to hang on long enough, make enough friends to get selected, promoted, appointed or at least ensure your family member ‘gets into power’. In law life, ageism is everything. Stand still and in a few years you could end up being magistrate, judge, take silk even. In between waiting, Law School assures us all of a steady stream of juniors to bully and harass, in the right quantity to massage our ageing egos.

Law is amoral. While some other professions expect you to take oaths of kindness and goodness to humankind etc, law does the direct opposite. It allows your play Mr. Hyde without feeling bad about it. Law extols backstabbing, lying and all the other stuff we all really want to do but which society otherwise scorns.

It is easier to save money while in law practice. You don’t really need to spend plenty on clothes as long as you have the robe. Also, no one will every accuse you of mismatching colours – it’s hard to go wrong with white and black. The only downside is the loss of aesthetic appreciation of colours and the fact that we’ll probably spend a lot more on deodorants to try to mask the stench of sweat under the robe.

Law pays you for the hours you spend. You really don’t have to do much – you can Facebook, read up all the news on the THISDAY website, or play Spider Solitaire. As long as there is a client to bill for writing a letter or ‘carrying our research’, you’ll be fine.

Unlike the Nigerian Senate where the public ignorantly assumes that its members reason with some semblance of logic; lawyers are not burdened with such expectations. It is in fact our job to make the most irrational arguments like ‘Muttalab is innocent until proven guilty’ or ‘the doctrine of necessity supersedes the Constitution’. Once in a while, lesser mortals try to steal our thunder. Fortunately, they rarely get away with our job – ask Charly Boy and his pro-Iwu marchers. No one does it better than lawyers do.

*Rookie Lawyer offers fictitious rants about the law profession. She does not reflect the true position of law practice. In real life, she is a perfectly reasonably boring young lawyer.

Shh... Lawyering is a Scam!

2010-04-06T19:44:00.001+01:00

Perhaps, no one really needs lawyers. At least not in the way we need a non-phantom president; or members of the Senate whose thought processes will inspire our secondary school students; or in the way we assume we need ministers who can manage prayer sessions and culinary skills without spilling their loyalty. Laywering, of course, does not come up close to teaching, medicine, or engineering, whose skills keep our minds, bodies and skulls safe. Yet, lawyers have managed to get a lot of attention and charge for bills for what looks like doing most of nothing.

It is like a scam everyone falls for – not 419 enough for EFCC to arrest us and set up a press conference about how fantastic the organisation is, but a scam still. Like the way people pay underage hustlers for ‘cleaning’ their windscreens in traffic on Lagos roads when every idiot knows that the Omo laced water will only leave streaks on the glass. Or the way we pay park attendants for ‘helping’ us park or give the scary looking guys next door ‘weekend dash money’. Lawyers seem to charge people for services no one really needs, and the world falls for it every time.

Take the lawyer’s basic services – attending meetings, preparing agreements, giving opinions, listening (or pretending to listen) to clients rant about how their partner / wife / other person, all have long red tails and horns and is horrible, etc. Most people can do that without legal help. If we scrap meetings and use emails and everyone becomes saints and adheres to agreements, we can easily take the lawyer out without a bother. Luckily many can write so the email bit is easier to manage. Better still, if the world’s sainthood prospects fail, we can work with threats or other extra judicial methods to enforce our agreements. Listening is pretty easy, pastors will do it without a fee and gossip mongers will do it for free for the thrill. Opinions, like talk are cheap – every fool has one. Appearing in court, which may the only tricky bit is not as worrying when you think about the number of ‘fake lawyers’ who have practised successfully for years. Certainly, everything can be learnt on the job.

Technically, a law degree seems as useful as a complete pair of Cinderella’s glass slippers in Mile 12 market or a nice fireplace in one of Ikoyi’s posh houses. They look good, are pretty expensive but are useless in the real world.

So why do we have lawyers? In figuring this out, the easiest people available for any irrational conspiracy theorist are the ‘they’ (one world for government, the schools and basically every one worthy of suspicion). The schools make more money for keeping students in for five years instead of four. Law school gets them for another year, and the government subsidises the fees so because of the ‘compulsory’ dinners at Law School. Feeding students makes the government look good, as it part-fulfils its MDG goals. ‘They’ also have to keep the schools open because it is cheaper to pay salaries than force the lecturers to retire. The law profession gains the most – the feudality of it all, ensures that SANs continue to maximise their superiority over the rest of us and seniors continue to bully juniors. The juniors, victims of the Stockholm Syndrome are reluctant to rebel out of affection for the SANs and other seniors – and so it goes in a circle.

Despite the many bad bad things people say, lawyers will be here for a while. History itself seems to tell of the dark ages before us – like Eve in the Garden of Eden and her lame finger pointing Statement of Defence, which was not even a general traverse: ‘the serpent deceived me’. *Smsh* A lawyer could have built a stronger case.

Then in Lagos. King Dosumu could have gotten a better bargain for ceding Lagos to the British – perhaps, interests in the South-South. At the worst, a good lawyer would have scuttled negotiations and history as we now know it.

Here is my take on it all: lawyers have successfully created an ‘indispensability’ myth for centuries, it is not going to disappear anytime soon.

One Piece of Non-Fiction

2010-04-06T18:38:00.004+01:00

On Tuesday 13th April 2010, young people in Nigeria will fight: we will not play Mandela or throw bombs. We will, however, strengthened by our anger, do what we can.

We will call for rightness with a strong faith in a better future:
Plenty more here at Enough is Enough

The Bigger Picture is the 2011 Vision:
RSVP: OUR PLAN FOR 2011…
Register (R): Empower yourself. Stop complaining and get your vote on!
Select (S): Choose wise, responsible people to support! Good leaders build a good nation.
Vote (V): Take Charge. Exercise your power. Roll with your buddies/clique to the polling booth.
Protect (P): Make your vote count. Don’t walk away from your future.

Maybe this will not do plenty. Maybe it will. We have to do something to find out.

Take-off point is Archbishop Vinning at 11 am.

If I were a Judge...

2010-03-30T19:03:00.004+01:00

Judges are what lawyers want to be when they grow up – or as gaffe prone Joe Biden could put it: Lawyers are second-class citizens in law-world. Everything points to some show of superiority of the judiciary over the toiling lawyers; like the way people ignorantly assume that the justice minister is superior to the minister for special duties.

Even the language used betrays the disequilibrium. Lawyers are ‘called to the bar’; judges are ‘elevated to the bench’. Lawyers are merely learned friends. Judges on the other hand are not merely learned but are Lordships, Honours, Worships and all the language that signifies a halo right above the grey wig.

It is professional bigotry! People seem to forget that the judges were once lawyers. So, while they disparage us daily, make lawyer jokes that insert shark-teeth around our oratorical jaws; judges get off easy, smelling like new money. It’s a good-bad ‘cop’ situation (‘police’ is too Nigerian and may be interpreted as insolence to the bench). Lawyers are the bad cops, the ones mocked for their zealous pursuits of their clients interests. There is something about being a judge that brings on awe and feelings of ineptitude in the beholder. Few would cast aspersions on a judge; well until judgment is given to the other party.

From the magistrate courts to the Supreme Court, the judiciary is all powerful, all knowing and almost always right. At trial, judges are the infinitely perceptive eyes and ears of the court. Trial judges are also part-time psychologists since we agree that they can interpret the witness’ demeanour and are blessed with the innate gift of knowing the lawyer who tells the most lies. Judges must also have rather strong wrists to support the fingers that take down the noises lawyers make. Smart lawyers have caught on to extensive powers of the trial judge and have learnt to defer to their preferences. The judge in the court we appear in may determine the length of our skirts, the size of our jewellery and anything their imperial inclinations desire.

The appellate courts are in another realm. It is like an impenetrable sect. Nothing brings terror and dread to the most confident lawyers like a ‘judicial whisper’ (aka, the words justices murmur seconds after a lawyer finishes what he assumed what a brilliant argument and seconds before the lawyer stops assuming he was close to brilliant). Their Lordships are infinitely wise and omniscient – or we hope they are since technically, ‘appealing to God’ after the Supreme Court, might be a bit of a stretch.

Better still, judges do not really retire. People refer to judges as ‘Justice X’, ‘Mr. Justice X’, twenty years after X wore a wig. The Nigerian in many of us cannot deny the effect of a high sounding honorific. Even honorary doctorate holders proudly insert the ‘Dr’ immediately after ‘Chief’ when writing their names. Lawyers, on the other hand, do not have the luxury of a grandiose appellation. Save some community chieftaincy title, we are stuck with the same plain old Mr., Miss, *yawn* Mrs and Ms.

The only snag to being a judge is the asexuality. Females apparently do not exist in the judiciary. I often see lawyers, who without blinking, refer to a female judge (who wears a skirt, long weaves even if primly tied to a bun, make-up, has well manicured fingers and does everything women do) as ‘Your learned brother’ or ‘Your Lordship’. Really, after all the time and money spent at the salon and make-up store, a little expression of recognition would not be out of place!

I think I can live with that though. Caster Semaya still has her Olympic gold medal.
Being a judge will be fun. It will feel like a third skin, right above my unwarranted ego one. Lording over counsel who could ordinarily be bullying seniors in any law factory would give me immense pleasure. Judging can’t be that hard – apart from the writing bit, all I’ll have to do is pretend I am listening, point out illogicality in counsel’s arguments and use counsel’s research to write a judgement. I could also use precedents. At the appellate court, I’ll simply ‘concur with the well reasoned opinion of my learned brother’.

If I were a judge, I would sit at 8 am everyday just so I can pontificate about how hardworking I am. I would make no exceptions – rain, hail, thunder, federal executive council or otherwise. On days when the court’s generating set decides to go the way of the nation’s electrical supply, I would be undeterred from sitting and appearing to do justice.

Heaven help any poor counsel who comes in late. I would use my practiced supercilious eye on errant counsel look and make sure to make some quip merely to teach her a lesson. Just before she announced appearance, I would quickly strike out her matter for ‘lackadaisical prosecution’ of the matter.

I would be Draco-mistress of all, Catherine the Great, Margaret Thatcher, all rolled into one.

Judging will be bliss.

Random Thoughts: Myth Busters

2010-03-29T11:17:00.000+01:00

TGIAF – Thank God it’s almost Friday. I am not in court today and I am not offering to appear in court. My thoughts today run to the awe lawyers still manage to garner, which is in itself is awesome with the number of lawyers in the country and on television. Lawyers, like most heroes are yet mystified - a thing that will probably continue for as long as we wear the most distinct uniform of all (and that includes the clown’s). In my Joan D’Arc mode (aka, slayer of ignorance) though, I have decided to shine light on these mysteries.

Myth: People who talk a lot are likely to be the best lawyers

Reality: Prattling lawyers are rarely winners.

For one minute, put yourself on a bench, in a very thick gown and really heavy wig in some African country. Imagine that as you patiently withstand the heat, your job also involves listening to people natter about everything and nothing – like you don’t get enough from the Federal Executive Council. So, you patiently listen and since you can’t tell the difference between the hundreds of cases you hear, you also have to write down what they say. After a while, you realise that when people talk a lot, they often insert a number of ‘untruths’. It hurts that people try to deceive you. Soon you get suspicious when a person in a wig says something as innocuous as ‘Good morning’. You also have the thankless task of reading through briefs and cases to counter the prejudice-arrows shot at your saintly impartiality.

Then, add to our scenario that you now have the discretionary power in certain cases. You check your quiver: you can’t do anything about the increasing heat to your skin; you can however do something about the lawyer who thinks falling in love with one’s voice is in.

Which lawyer wins?

Myth: Lawyers Read Books
Reality: Lawyers Like To Think They Read Books

Some photographer must have assumed that the only acceptable background for lawyers’ pictures is a bookshelf filled with old, unread law reports and texts aka ‘the book’. At some point, everyone started to believe her and since then, the rule has come to stay. Once in a while, an adventurous rebel takes a picture behind a swivel chair and almost succeeds, save a hint of ‘the book’, perhaps right on the far left of the desk.

It makes sense – ‘the book’ implies wealth and wisdom. However, at the best of times, it is no more than a prop.
Lawyers don’t display the dog eared books they really read on shelves. Once in a while, with an eye on a client, the wise lawyer makes a show of flipping through some leather bound text. Often, the client falls for it and mentally justifies the bill the lawyer charges. Everyone is happy.
The book will probably outlive us all.

In the true tabloid fashion: More shattering exposes soon. Watch Out!

Law Life Does Not Imitate Art.

2010-03-25T11:19:00.000Z

Despite what everyone thinks, practicing law is far from fun. Of course, underlying my sweeping statement is my lawyer-conceit that assumes that people find time to wonder about what we do and attach some sentiment to what pays our bills. I however like to think that somewhere in between the security issues, a distracted National Assembly, energy (non-) supply, the existence or otherwise of a non-acting President, among other thought-worthy issues; we do our bit in keeping the world well hung. In any case, time has shown that worries have nothing on Nigeria since life tends to go on. The education minster will party in the midst of labour strikes in the education sector; the budget will be signed whether or not the President exists; graduates will be deployed to a state that is giving Georgia and Turkey a run for their CNN coverage (who cares if we lose a few of them), etc.

Once in a while however, I get statements like ‘wow, you are a lawyer! I read Grisham, you know’, accompanied with a misty-eyed look. I am usually amused at the disappointment people show when I fail to provide the ‘I am your soul-sista’ or ‘I feel like we totally connect, you know’ expected response. It is however difficult to sympathise with anyone who takes a retiree lawyer’s views seriously. If law was really that fascinating, Grisham would be in some law factory, loving the law and oblivious to the world and everything around him, rather than writing about it.

Law life does not imitate the art. The closest thing to ‘real’ lawyers is something in between the respected late vociferous Gani and what some bad belles may have called ‘lethargic’ former justice minister. Most lawyers are really boring with lives where the sole excitement or show of revolt is in the colour of pocket kerchief they choose to wear on the day they appear on NTA to provide blustery contradictory statements on the most recent drama at the National Assembly. The rest like me are the juniors who do work no one wants and is sent to clients who are looking for someone to blame and really don’t want to listen to our opinion. Grisham does nothing to paint what really happens.

One of the most influential pictures of lawyers is probably a man in a suit and in classic Johnnie Cochran style – ‘if it doesn’t fit, you must acquit’ to a mentally bullied jury. In real life, there is no judging jury of twelve. The judge is all we have and is too egoistic to be bullied. There are also no dramatic opening or closing statements since the rules of court mandate counsel file written addresses. The Nigerian lawyer has little or no chance to grow his oratorical mastery and in any case, the bench is the sole listener to the soundless oratory on paper.

Lawyers don’t say ‘objection my Lord’ every three minutes like Nollywood wants us to think. Law practice has largely evolved from table banging objections to smoother ways of backstabbing. In any case, (for the reasons outlined in the previous paragraph) verbal lawyering is a fading art. One more thing Nollywood does not get right – lawyers do not ‘rejoice’ with their clients after the judge gives a ruling with their favour. Whoever wrote that into a script?
Almost every self-respecting Nigerian family has coerced the least resistant child into studying law. There are so many lawyers in Nigeria that the allure has largely worn off. It follows that apart from the beloved human rights lawyer, who is near knighted, the rest of us are largely disdained or ignored. Members of the unfortunate lawyer-less families are easily recognisable – that are the ones that call us ‘De-law’.

Fiction rarely mentions the wig and gown. For obviously sartorial reasons, few non-Nollywood movie directors bother with clichéd uniform. The lawyers wear dark sharp Saville Row suits. Some even get away with Legally Blonde-pink. Ha. Law in real life is sober – black gowns over sober flat shoes and everything anti-aesthetic.

On television, most lawyers stick with basic salutation – Mr. Miss, Mrs, Ms. Anyone seeking the ire of a ‘real’ Nigerian lawyer may stick with fiction. Here, lawyers are identified by the prefix ‘barrister-’ or ‘lawyer-‘.

Have a great week.

Lawyer Rookie

Diary of A Desperate Naija Woman

2010-03-23T09:28:00.003Z

There is a book every woman and woman lover must read: 'The Diary of A Desperate Naija Woman'

I met Bola Nelson today. She is even more delightful in person than virtually (we've had an email relationship).

I absolutely love her book - which has little to do with an acknowledgment in it (ok, maybe a littler!)

She is on Amazon Barnes and Noble and better still on her own blog

Good lawyers Don’t Make Good Friends

2010-03-08T11:19:00.000Z

Lawyers are victims of the conflict between the worlds we live in and the world our ‘educationally disadvantaged’ family and friends know. We are torn between our stronger inclinations of law training – backstabbing, pride, snobbery, resilient nitpicking, among others - and the ignorant world outside the courtroom and law office. Law training often wins.

Take Latin. In law-world, Latin is cool, smooth and amazing – like a young Antonio Banderas speaking Spanish we don’t understand. Outside law-world, Latin is a dead language used only at the Vatican City. Law-world is clearly insulated from the outside as lawyers hold staunchly to Latin phrases no one understands or cares about.
For instance, lawyers, ensuring that mortals are within a earshot are more likely to say things like: ‘Oh, was it done uberrimae fidei?’; ‘I would not worry about it, the matter is res judicata.’
It must be some love for vowels.

Regular people grow friendships by spending time together, sharing jokes with friends and family, leaning on the shoulders of kith and kin during the rough times, etc. Apart from the fact that lawyers hardly have enough time for frivolities as building friendships, no properly trained legal mind can spend one hour with other people without mentally preparing a bill of charges. Even pro bono lawyers prepare a bill then write it off. We have to justify every second of the day.

We also find the telephone pretty disconcerting and against our very ideals. Somewhere in our treecidal minds, the telephone as a ploy to usurp the paper – our one true love. Telephone conversations also do little for our litigious minds – burden of proof is needlessly heavy, and the witnesses’ demeanour cannot be observed from one end of the telephone line. Nigerian lawyers are particularly suspicious of recorded conversations as few courts would actually admit them. We also have to deal with the issue of the constitutional right to privacy,

In the real world, forgiveness is idealised. People like to make up and deal with situations. In law-world, arbitration is for losers and negotiation is only as good as when we win. Real lawyers fight to the bitter end, dragging their clients with them.

We also revel in spotting typos. Finding one or better still, a flaw in another’s arguments or a law no one will ever use is mentally celebrated with balloons and trumpets. We really like this – actually we really like anything at all that reminds us of our intelligence.
Our skills in this area are not really appreciated in real life. People live life spelling their names as ‘Jennifa’ and don’t really bother about it. Most lawyers can’t keep themselves from pointing out typos on BlackBerry messages or Facebook statuses.

Law teaches that primary school was a waste of time - ‘and’ does not always mean ‘and’; ‘or’ has more meaning than a two letter word can offer. When in doubt, we use ‘and/or’. The smartest lawyers can use ten years to get a matter dealing with the definition of ‘should’ from trial to the Supreme Court.

We love to hear us speak. Other people think that the only set of people who they really have to listen to is the Minister of Information and the Acting President (when he acts). Usually, anytime we try to go beyond a 140-letter twitter, people ignore us. We don’t like being ignored.

Aside: Why I went to Law School

2010-03-03T09:18:00.000Z

In court, appearing alone against some lawyer whose white hair takes the glamour off his wig. While we wait:

‘How are you?’
‘Fine Sir.’
‘So, who did you come with?’
‘I am appearing alone Sir.’
‘Why?’

Well, could it be because call to the Nigerian Bar generally gives you the right to appear in courts by yourself?

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

2010-02-23T11:15:00.000Z

At about 7: 45 am, I watch Ghandi struggle with two heavy files on his way from the filling room. His glasses are slightly askew and his barrister’s jacket is a little higher than it should be. In my characteristically saintly mode, I offer to help him carry the lighter looking file. While we walk down the stairs, we make small talk. It turns out he was to appear with Plain-short who fell ill over the weekend and could not make it to the office.

‘Oh...’
‘Yes, so I will be appearing alone’. We are on the first floor.

At this point, sensible Rookie ought to have shut up or moved on to the weather and other ‘safe’ topics but sensible Rookie had not had her shot of caffeine. It was a case of diminished responsibility. I was not thinking straight. Then again, the work-free Friday made me lose my edge and a scoop of sense.

I hear myself offering to appear with him. I assume that it would score me brownie points and that in any case, since the matter was merely for adoption of motions, so I would be back in an hour.

‘Adopt and leave. That should not take forever’ – I reason. So, I run up, grab my wig only taking a few seconds to drag it across the wall for the right amount of dirt and distinguished threadbare look.

I do not realise the dire consequences of my good deed until we get to court and it’s filled with what appears to be the all the lawyers in Lagos. Everyone knows that the next worse thing to braving traffic and rain for an empty court is braving traffic or rain for a full court. Our matter is listed twenty-eighth on the cause list. The judge is one of those annoyingly efficient ones who would sit through rain, fire and no electricity.

What hurts most is not the thoughts of spending time away from my pc and Facebook tool but the fact that I could have earned the same brownie points by volunteering for work which I could pass on to some junior.

It is finally our turn at past three and we adopt our motions (which really means that Ghandi mentions my name while I take a bow; he speaks while I take notes). I am body-tired, mind-exhausted and definitely anti-good deeds.

Spell- Checking For a Good Cause

2010-02-18T18:19:00.000Z

Gloater has been sending me her personal statements to spell check. Like the rest of Nigeria, she is applying for a master’s degree in some UK school and ‘is really hoping that bomber boy hasn’t ruined this for us’. She assumes I have nothing better to do that read through her lofty sounding ideals about saving the world and Africa (apparently, Africa is a little country, well away from the world). Although it has been a slow week (perfect after Grey-stripes Saturday drama), I realise my time could be spent playing Spider Solitaire or some other worthy pursuit while pretending to work.

There is nothing wrong with an LLM. In fact, it is a Nigerian civic duty to ‘do masters’ immediately after university. Besides the much touted theoretical reason – adding to the body of knowledge – it also allows you to wrinkle your nose and politely despise those who schooled in the ‘failing Nigerian school system’ while getting a year off traffic, work javascript:void(0)and buying credit for people who think you earn enough to share. Better still, when you return, you automatically earn the right to demand for a pay raise even if you have no clue as to what your mint certificate purports to teach you.

One advantage though – I get to keep her statements and rework it for me when I want to apply.

Saturday: Law the Diva.

2010-02-14T17:13:00.000Z

I understand that law takes a lot of attention and time - and I don’t mean the time we take to wear the shirt, suit, button the collar, robe, adjust the wig etc. After spending five years at undergraduate level learning a lot of things any self-respecting idler will forget before convocation, we get to spend yet another at law school, with parting words about reading all through one’s career. Thankfully, our National Assembly makes catching up with the law a whole lot easier.

In any case, six years of school is a disproportionate time for a course half as versatile as a Chemistry or Zoology, which can make you president or vice-president (and everyone knows that being vice-president is a potentially powerful or stagnant position, depending on the country you live in or what excuses the legislature can wield).

It follows that my random and regularly irrational ranting rarely involves regular mortals who have nothing to do with law i.e. family and friends. I don’t talk about them because they don’t really exist - not in the literal sense, since unlike Terminator, I happen to have come to earth by more conventional means. They don’t exist in the time-worth-spending scale. In the pursuit of law, I have come to recognise what is important and whose needs reign supreme: the salary provider and the client. I have then come to ignore those that have nothing to do with payment of bills, salary increases and those who have no power over my motions, appeals or determination of the next adjourned date.

‘Quite frankly’ (the verbal synonym for: a really modest shrug or the sound of patting my back), the only reason I can recognise the office building during the day is because I sometimes leave my tiny cubicle to appear in court. I hold my donkey-ethic in working seriously and have learnt to perfect the art of ‘work’ and ‘busy’. Naturally, in case anyone forgets this fact, I remind the salary provider about my consistent lack of life and love for the law by sending emails at 9:30 pm on Friday evening and working weekends since everyone knows weekends are the most effective time to begin intensive legal research.

While I take special pride and fulfilment in bragging about how hard I work and the number of hours I spend at the office on weekdays and weekends, I see no reason why I should be at work today – the Saturday before Valentine’s Day.

Grey-Stripes (aka kill-joy, destroyer of my personal satisfaction) and who has no life outside the office except on his Blackberry decided that we (three other associates and I) meet today to review an agreement that I strongly suspect won’t self-destruct by Monday morning. I have tried every subtle and shameless hint to get out of this, feigned a cold and stomach ache, made repeated calls on my phone and hints that have not worked. Right now, I am contemplating mistakenly spilling water on my keyboard, pulling out my hair or some other act that indicates the need for strong men in white coats.
*Smsh*

--
Finally we finish at a quarter to four, time enough for ice-cream and a movie. This is when I really really hate the law.

Why Lawyers are Indispensable

2010-02-10T08:29:00.001Z

Received new instructions today.

Last year, the client expressed an intention to buy a house in England but didn’t want her husband, Mr. Client to know. We were to handle the transaction until she sent a letter telling us that she had ‘resolved the matter’.

It turns out that she gave the money to a ‘longstanding family friend’ to purchase it on her behalf but in Mr. Family Friend’s name. Unfortunately, Mr. Family Friend died last month before he could transfer title to her.

Mrs. Family Friend has refused to pass the title to the client since her husband ‘did not tell her he bought the property for anyone’.

Mrs Client is angry and has come to the office to throw a tantrum. She wants to sue and hurl a fine dose of Zeus’ (or more appropriately, Sango’s) thunder bolts at Mrs. Family Friend. The first could be arranged though I am unsure about the second.

Unfortunately, suing will bring Mr. Client in the know. She does not think Mr. Client would be inclined to pat her on the back for hiding this from him.

She wants her lawyers to advise her. I could tell her in one sentence to tell her husband and maybe mediate or conciliate with Mrs. Family Friend. Plain-short has however instructed that I write a four-page opinion telling her the same thing and send her a bill.

I could also tell her that she could have avoided this by executing a trust deed with Mr. Family Friend or some other legal means but it would ring much of ‘we told you so’.

Soliloquy: Carrots work:

2010-02-10T07:29:00.000Z

Carrots work: I hear distinguished lawyers have taken silk. I am awed, impressed etc.

The ‘Conspiracy’ Against the Messenger

2010-02-08T11:26:00.000Z

Despite what ‘the media’, ‘aggrieved parties’ claim or any potential rallies or solidarity walks calling for the resignation of all lawyers; lawyers are not the villain. ‘They’ are merely conspiring to tarnish the image of this noble profession.

Lawyers are inherently good people (aka salt of the earth, righter of wrongs, ministers in Lady Justice’s temple etc). We are also patient and long-suffering, attributes that are clearly shown by our staunch decision to wear our uniforms in the sweltering heat even though it has been largely discarded in England, the ‘owner’ of the uniform.

If there is any hanging to be done – it should be of clients, whom we ‘happen’ to represent. Clients are the ‘bad people’, people!

Sadly, few minds are discerning enough to notice the fine line between the ‘bad people’ and the inherent goodness wrapped in skin underneath the wig and gown. Clients are the ones who do wrong and rely on us for help, which we benevolently provide for a fee. Just because we get to do the talking does not make us the wrongdoer!

I admit that sometimes saving the world can be pretty tough. Take for instance, the poor counsel for the naval ratings who must have sounded as ridiculous as: ‘My Lord, my clients, who are trained to fight in wars, were frightened of the non-Attila looking citizen and acted in self defence. The video of the beating was actually framed. It is blackmail! My poor clients only acted to defend their integrity’.

Sometimes, the unfortunate lawyer is saddled with a fight against commonsense: My Lord, my bank executive client merely acted in good faith when he helped himself to a little more of other people’s money and used his position for private profit.

There is however, a marked difference between the arguments we present and the really good and modest person who lives with mere mortals without protest despite her clear messianic qualities. We suffer reproach everyday – from clichéd lawyer-shark analogy jokes to clear protests of our existence.

*insert theatrical self-suffering sign*

We rise above these and remain amazing. However, we don’t take our ‘amazing-hood’ for granted neither do we assume that society will understand that technicalities rather than a general perception of justice win cases. We understand that we are special and very smart and in the face of hatred and ‘beef’; we hold our head high, defending the ‘poor’ (in the figurative sense!) accused persons.

What is a good person supposed to do? Turn the clients away? Daily, we fight between our consciences and our work with ‘bad people’, who incidentally pay us to keep our offices open. Every day, we are torn between our beatitudinal attributes and natural proclivity to work hard and the client.

*sniff*

We shall overcome.

Ladies, Gentlemen and Lawyers

2010-02-04T15:58:00.000Z

The underlings (Rookier Rookie and the other younger lawyers aka juniors, minions, life beneath the life under the ladder, etc) are scampering all over the office like overfed puppies, obviously excited about doing ‘real’ work’.

*Face is set in disapproving expression. Insert supercilious eye over pursed lips.*

You should see the way they preen on their way to court with their necks held stiff in a bid to draw attention to their collars. They are all excited about the wig and gown and still clueless about the dark days ahead. In my characteristically benevolent manner, however, I have decided to draw a caution list to guide them through this trying period of metamorphosis from innocent, ready-to-save-the-world Hercules, to the cynical show-me-the-money ambulance chasers. I’ll leave out the easy bits of wisdom – like how to keep your collar starched and sharp between two law reports, how to hide a novel from the bench during a long judgement and other worthy tips for another day.

Lesson One: Never rely on carrots.
It is okay to assume that you will graduate with a law degree after spending the required years in school. It is forgivable to think passing law school examinations really gives you a right to appear by yourself at the Supreme Court the following day. What is plain ignorant is to make plans which assume that the years of reading fine print, brownnosing judges and seniors and doing all things detrimental to self worth and pride will pay in the end as you take silk.

In real life, things don’t work as smoothly as you may discover that the year before the Supreme Court finally rules on your fourth ‘outstanding’ case for your SAN application, bad belles start to make calls to scrap SAN status. At that point, all your lofty dreams and your life’s work come crashing down. Worse still, you realise that all the time spent planning your grand entrance to court as you send the lesser and apparently mortal lawyers to the outer bar, were all wasted.

Lesson Two: Change your name or style.

Except your name is Goodluck, don’t take it for granted that good things will indeed drop on your laps while you pleasantly wait. Being a superstar and making partner by thirty-five is a lofty dream when the strikes in school ensured that you manage to graduate while eyeing thirty. However, don’t lose hope. What you should lose is the assumption that dedication and hard work will take you far. Learn the fine art of schmoozing and ensure at least one equity-partner thinks you are family with a different surname. Then again, work on your creativity and ingenuity at making perfectly reasonable excuses for avoiding work.

Lesson Three: Distinguish between theory and practice

Theory – learn the law; uphold it and you won’t go wrong.
Practice – The law is an ass, whip it as hard as you want. It is tough, resilient and would bend under your skilful whipping. Capiche?

Lesson Four: Nice lawyers are losers.

Remember those nice clichés about lawyers being ministers in the temple of justice and the lovely little book on the rules of professional conduct that contains really good things about how lawyers ought to behave? ‘Ought’ is the operative word. Forget every word you read. In fact, try to get a refund from the bookshop. It’s a dog eat dog world, where we stick daggers in each other’s backs. Tough and trained lawyers would not even say good morning to other lawyers as this may amount to an admission of fact on some fine legal point.

Lesson Five: Create illusions.

Get a Blackberry. Blackberry satisfies the important need to appear busy and wanted. Just fiddle away on it, people will assume you are loved and have a life outside the hours spent in the office.

Lesson Six: Show off.

Most importantly, stop reading unserious time wasting blogs like this one. Go to the library and pick a copy of last week’s law report. Read it with the underlying rationale to show off your knowledge at lunch while your Big Oga is across the table. If he is not there, show off to someone else. Just let everyone know how smart you are.

There. Rules to guide your path.

All with love from big Aunty Rookie.

My Epiphany

2010-02-01T12:23:00.000Z

If I had lingering doubts about my ‘calling’, reading something on CNN Money totally resolved them and eased my conscience. It had this report on the top ten companies with the highest pay packages in America.

Guess which sector had six of the ten slots – law offices!!!

Immediately, it struck me that studying law was the right decision. I am on the right path. This is ‘what I was meant to do’; ‘my passion has led me to my vocation’.... *insert other high-sounding epiphanic expressions*.

Now, if only Big Oga took time to read the news.

Press Rewind

2010-01-29T18:30:00.000Z

Have you ever felt like having a rewind button on life – like that time during Law School exams, you suddenly realised that the one page you skipped while reading is the one with compulsory question 1?

I have been having some ‘challenges’ with a Norwegian client who does not want to pay our bill of charges. I have called, emailed, called, emailed the contact person, so many times that I feel like a stalker. Yet the client is a relentless ijebu, determined to hold on payment for as long as it can.

In desperation, I forward the client’s latest response to Gloater with a line – ‘these [name of client] want to 419 us o! They want us to show them why the US is fear-ing us!’

Forthright, maybe; but certainly non-distinguished lawyer language.

I thought I forwarded it to Gloater - alone. Just as I send, I realise I forwarded the ‘joke’ to the client. I try to recall the message – no such luck.

Oh dear!

This is the most important time when life needs a rewind button – ok, second most important after America told the world its intelligence reports established weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Witnesses Are Annoying

2010-01-27T09:42:00.000Z

Lawyers don’t really like witnesses – regular witnesses; hostile witnesses, anybody that speaks in court, besides the judge (and only when ruling in our favour). Our grandiose egos do not take kindly to anyone who tries to steal the limelight from us. Witnesses are generally horrible nightmares. They can’t get over the fact that people listen to them for the few minutes that they get to speak. We, on the other hand, are trained to expect people to listen to us and are paid for it.

The only thing worse than a witness, is a witness who is a client. Everyone knows that clients are people who are only good for the bills but assume that paying lawyers make them half as smart as lawyers.

Witnesses pretend, exaggerate, fumble, get threatened by the other lawyers and often ruin the good work of us hardworking lawyer by telling the ‘truth’ (yes, it is a dirty word!).

Unfortunately, despite our clear dislike for these people, the justice scale tilts on proof of facts, making witnesses generally indispensable. Usually, to mitigate this ‘unfortunate circumstances’, lawyers have pre-trial meetings with their witnesses. In law school, the technical word is ‘preparing the witness’ for the court. In real life, we simply teach the witness the nicest way to tell our truth. Sometimes, it works and the witness does the job and we are happy. Sometimes, it does not, yet we try anyway.

Right now, I am in court with Ghandi and Gloatter for trial. Our witness is in the box and after three pre-trial meetings; one would expect that she would not stumble and ‘umm’ or ‘ahh’ like she is acting now. Ghandi is trying some damage control but it’s not werking.

I want to throw something at her or her at something. Naturally, all my intents are safe in my mind, since she is a witness-client.

Inferior Lawyers Charge Cheap

2010-01-25T08:19:00.000Z

Legend has it that lawyering stands two steps higher than nobility and one lower than sainthood. The dignity of our profession was therefore preserved by a disdain for ‘earthly’ things such as money and all things plebeian. Even our barrister’s robe was carefully sewn so that the pocket was placed literarily behind the barrister. Everyone recognised that money was a mere distraction which kept the minister’s mind from his duty to stand at the temple of justice, poised to do good to all and sundry.

Smart clients however caught on to the fact that the barrister’s goodness and kindness did little to pay for food, clothing and other necessities of life. They would therefore gently place gold in the lawyer’s pockets as he saved the world. Naturally, the increased weight in the barrister’s pocket was sure to be quickly noticed by a slight ache on the shoulder, leading to energised advocacy and defence of rights.

Most of the legend still holds. The proper lawyer, despite being a solicitor, does not ‘solicit’ or bother his scholarly mind about money and other mundane matters. He uses prim and sober stamp sized labels to differentiate his office from the next. His fees are ‘reasonable’ and proper. He is excited at thoughts of being rich but quickly curbs his enthusiasm with the right amount of sobriety. In legends, the proper lawyer would be knighted and fitted with a halo.

In the real world where it makes better sense to sack football coaches and ignore the fact that the available players are never properly trained, cheap lawyers are perceived to be inferior. The higher the fees, the better.

The ‘smart’ lawyer is well, smarter. We see the law as a business in the dog-eat-dog and maul the other dog if it tries to even steal a look at your bone (client). While we refrain from using bill boards to advertise our services, we ensure that we provide legal opinions on the state of the nation with all the pomp and pageantry of Keyamo in front of a camera.

Economic issues aside, real lawyers don’t charge cheaply. Of course, we may have ‘structure’ our fees a little to accommodate kobo pinching, but we remain true to the course - stalking clients, hold on to them and ensure they pay for everything.

We never lose.

Mi’ Lord, the Invincible

2010-01-19T16:30:00.000Z

Judges can do anything – in the undefined, unrestricted, ‘there-is-nothing-you-can- do-about-it’ powerful way. Besides being distinguished on literal pedestals, judges are our twenty-first century Solomons who get to decide between right or wrong, while being objectively detached from the one-step-closer-to-mortal heap of lawyers on the floor of the bar. We all defer to their Lordships either because we are unused to the idea of so many clothes on a breathing being or due to the natural awe we feel in the presence of dignity, while clothed in ordinary cotton.

Their Lordships decide which side the scale tilts, what actually gets recorded as the court’s record, how far Lady Justice peeps behind her blindfold, and even get to make laws within the gaps provided by words used by lawmakers.

Perfect. Right?

Then again, power comes with liabilities – ask God who has to listen to everyone’s prayers, the President who cannot play dead without telling the electorates; Big Oga who has to pay a lawyer’s salary for editorial work, etc.

Judges are tied to really bad burdens, primarily having to listen to lawyers natter on about how fantastic they are, for five days a week - an activity that is clearly cruel and enough to stretch anyone’s patience and goodness. It is no wonder that sometimes, things happen in courts to get back at the annoying nattering lawyers.

Sometimes, these things add up, sometimes they don’t.

Today, Ghandi and I are in court for a matrimonial matter. The petitioner’s counsel is about to enter appearance when the court, in a shrill voice that carried over to the back –

‘I wonder if counsel thinks that the court is a salon’.

Naturally, everyone does a mental check of appearances – the male, patting their flat wigs on nearly flat heads; female lawyers, tucking in any errant hair strands.

‘Ms. [X] I do not understand why your hair is dangling’.

At that time, the counsel from the other side realises she is the subject of Milady’s ire.

I look closely at her, trying to get a mental picture of ‘how not to wear your hair in court’ but disappointedly, she is wearing her hair in regular braids, bunched up in a boring knot behind her ears.

Ghandi whispers that at the last proceedings, the court had ‘hinted’ to another counsel about her ‘loud’ brown bag.

‘I am going to strike out your matter because of your dangling hair.’

At this time, everyone in court, excluding the clerks who must be used to the court’s non-regular rationale for striking out matters of errant counsel; look startled.

‘My Lord...’

‘Matter is struck out...’

If this were Nollywood, there would be some ‘gen-gen’ sound. Courts in real life tend to be quieter though and no sounds accompanied the pronouncement.

Theoretically, if the matter goes on appeal, counsel could refer the appellate court to the court’s records and make an issue of the reason for striking out the matter. However, since the trial court takes the notes that make up the court’s record, the power to challenge the record of proceedings carries as much clout as a constitutional provision allowing am executive council appointed by the present to declare their benefactor incapable of discharging his functions.

The Truth about Justice

2010-01-18T12:29:00.000Z

Besides the point that law almost pays my bills, I find the farces amusing, entertaining, etc. Take the Justitia allegory – Lady Justice with the blindfold, sword and scales. She is at every court and on every law text cover with space to fill and the perfect symbolism for us all – until we think it through.

Do you really want to trust a double-edged sword with a stereotypical emotionally imbalanced woman? What’s worse – she is as old as forever, making her menopausal, ‘naturally’ suspect to mood swings, fatigue, among other dreadful diseases, which do not affect the male folk.

Then again, she does not ‘shine her eye’. Why on earth would you trust the judgement of a blindfolded person whether male or female? The textbook response is impartiality but how impartial would you want a judge to be in the face of your ‘poor’ yacht-owning, Fifth Avenue condo living, borrower-client, whose inability to pay due to ‘the economic downturn’ is not appreciated by the lending banks but is bedevilled by annoying EFCC officials and bankers who do not know their place.
The scales are something else – everyone knows that substance and relevance matters over weight. What if Lady Justice’s arm sort of hurts at that time and the pain makes her tilt one to another? Obviously, suspending the scales all these years must have some effect on her muscles!

The toga – don’t get me started! That is so long that I worry about her freedom of movement. She would definitely trip over it.

Yeah, we try to make life easy and tell the truth – that is what lawyers do.

Muttalab, Yar'Adua etc: The Way We Live Through It.

2010-01-14T10:14:00.004Z

There is something 'Nigerian' about laughing about the very worst.

It keeps us sane, I reckon. Here is a video I found amusing:

An Aside: Yet another commentary

2010-01-12T16:40:00.001Z

Despite the fact that America’s profiling of terrorists may be a political attempt to convince the world that it has a clue as to its security issues – whether in the White House or in its airspace; one cannot help admiring its respect for the ‘rule of law’, presumption of innocence and a proper trial for suspected offenders. If a certain X was merely suspected of attempting to blow up one of the traffic lights at the airport, our diligent Nigeria Police Force would have either elicited a swift ‘confession’ from him or he would have been shot while ‘trying to escape’.

Lawyers are Annoying

2010-01-08T19:58:00.000Z

It is 7pm on Friday. I should be getting ready to do all things non-lawyerly and certainly incompatible with the legal profession. Instead, I am in a meeting with Gloater and two other associates at the conference room upstairs. The last three hours have been filled with strong arguments over clause 88 of an agreement, which allows the state government, to pay compensation upon the creation of a public highway within our client’s health farm. The law requires payment for the acquisition of land anyways and the clause, we argued, does nothing.
The client wants to refinance its project and the proposed refinancers have a Nigerian law firm representing them. They seem very eager to show how much thought they have put into the negotiation. After two hours of insisting that the clause be removed to disallow any acquisition, we have spent the hour after that arguing on the division of the percentage of compensation. It is very tiring and I an upset.

A Dummy’s Guide to Working with Lawyers

2010-01-06T08:35:00.000Z

A Dummy’s Guide to Working with Lawyers

People rarely understand genius – Socrates, Emily Bronte, Newton, Oscar Wilde, Joan of Arc, lawyers, etc. Despite our messianic work, we remain largely under-appreciated by humankind, particularly the client demographic which mostly ignores us outside EFCC custody. Our glaring indispensability to life and business is scarcely recognised by obsequious bowing or at least palm trees for our overpriced car to ‘tread upon’. People do not appreciate us enough!

Regardless, we remain steadfast to the cause, staying true to advocacy and ministering at the temple of justice for a fee. Therefore, in my altruistic mode, I have decided to help hapless clients in understanding their lawyers, just in time to make New Year resolutions.

Yes, I am kind, thoughtful, good and generous – a lawyer!

1. Never lie to your Lawyer – We Will Know
You cannot con a conman. I realise how tempting it is to look good and paint your picture as the wronged party but we see through untrained lying. This is because we are trained to tell ‘untruths’ in an objective and appealing manner and are more likely to do a better job. Always tell your lawyer the truth and let us retell it for you.

2. We are Indispensable – Get Used to it.
The lawyer is indispensable to the flow of life and business because we are smart and good (did I say that before?). Lawyers always win - although this may not necessarily be your lawyer.

3. Never Play Lawyer – We are Always Better than You Are
Don’t fall into the trap of arguing your case by yourself in the courts. Remember Eve in the Garden of Eden? She could have hired a lawyer. She did not – see where she ended up?

4. Pay your Bills on Time Every Time
This is as simple as it gets – pay up. We will hound you twice as hard as we hounded the other party until we get our money.

5. Stop Asking for Free Advice – Seriously!
Would you call a doctor on the phone for advice on your broken arm? No.
Would you stop a dentist on her way to the bathroom to get your teeth out? No.
Only the most desperate people would answer these questions in the affirmative – the same desperate people who never want to pay for reviewing an agreement or legal opinion.
Yes, we will smile, restrain ourselves from throwing a tantrum and give you free advice but we really do not like it.

6. Listen and Learn
We want you to clinch the deal and make money so that you can pay us. Whatever you think, your lawyer is not a spoil sport. We actually want your business to succeed. Don’t negotiate without us. When we say no, we usually have a reason to say that and it does not always have a thing to do with the fact that we don’t like the lawyer on the other side.

7. Respect Associates
The partners are the most important in every law office right? Wrong.
While we do not dispute our proximity to the life beneath the ladder, we get the work done. So next time you attend a meeting with your lawyers, please say hello the poor overworked associates taking notes behind the charming partner on your right. This may determine how quickly and well your work gets done.

Associates usually have a law degree and rarely major in coffee making – do not ask us to make your coffee, tea, anything. Walk to the tea table, scoop, pour, add water; pretty easy, eh?

There! Seven easy tips for a better year.

One more thing - to a beautiful year filled with joy, a better economy, fewer loans and more investments, and more love for the wig and gown. *Clinks coffee mugs*

Happy 2010.

Post-holiday Blues.

2010-01-05T13:13:00.002Z

I have a nicely typed ‘to-do’ list for this week, complete with colour codes to denote the urgency of each item. I spent one hour on deciding on the order of their priority and the next three hours to review a two-page letter. I have a sneaky feeling I may not really do anything about the to-dos. I am not worried about it. I worry about that.

Modest? Is that a Word?

2010-01-04T16:37:00.000Z

Lawyers are naturally conceited – with good reason. Law training assumes that the learning we do equips us to step in the shoes of a messianic advocate for mere mortals, play Voltron and defend the universe for a fee; acts that have little to do with modesty or meekness. Every time, a lawyer wins on either side. The winner in true hedonistic enjoyment, never lets anyone forget and tells and retells the victory story to anyone who would listen. The loser still gets to brag about how close they were to wining, how well the well-tried strategies could have worked and shone through despite the tough facts and the ignorant client..
We brag at anything – the size of our offices and the type of wigs our seniors wear; the transactions we work on even though all we did was read for typos; the number of SANs in our office, even if they no longer go to court; the schools we attended and the postgraduate degrees we probably will never use; the decade old mint-new books in our libraries; the sponsorship of seminars in other continents of which no one really cares. I have heard lawyers brag about how long they can stretch a case by numerous adjournments! We just love the double pleasure of hearing the sound of our voice and having other people listen to how good we are.
Luckily, Nigerian lawyers are way ahead of most African lawyers as our green passport quickly assures us of the extra attention that makes ‘do you know who I am’ irrelevant in international airports.
Outside the airports, bragging proves useful in securing a nice portion of our clients’ legal budget. Nothing assures the non-learned cheque-signer of absolute belief in the lawyer’s abilities to make the problem go away than hinting at a museum filled with relics of wars fought and won – ‘oh, transfer of ship from the Antarctica? We did something similar only last year’. Since few lawyers actually specialise, it is really easy to fall into the untruth-trap and claim bragging rights to something close to everything ranging from taxation of alien spacecraft to a legal opinion on the legality of the signature of the chief justice. We brag to get the work done.

New Year, Same Day

2010-01-04T11:31:00.000Z

It’s a New Year beginning with a new week. I reckon I ought to be thrilled, excited, energised, etc, as I put my resolutions together, determined to be a better and less grumpy lawyer, write better briefs and letters with less Latin and more English, be more patient with the younger ones (yeah, I am a senior now!), stylishly brownnose my way into a promotion and better salary, among other lofty ideals lawyers look up to at the beginning of a new year.

Unfortunately, getting straight to work on Monday morning and finding out that you have been assigned to a magistrate court in Ikeja and getting there only find out that your matter had been adjourned to February is not exactly thrill material. Regardless, I refuse to be stay grumpy or begin my year on a Grrr note.

The office is back in full swing, less talk and more earphones are used by associates in the pool room to drown out distractions, more people are pretending to work hard. Groveller is back after his suspicious illness which started the day after Boxing Day; Gloater stopped by to tell us about her weekend trip to Dubai with her new boyfriend. The firm gave everyone given faux leather green diaries, which ironically preach to users to save the environment.

Everything is like it was.

I Overwhelm Me

2009-12-23T18:58:00.000Z

Posh-tall asked me to prepare a legal opinion on some ‘interesting’ legal matter. ‘Interesting’ is the euphemism for ‘tedious’. Naturally, I am far from excited since research would take valuable Spider Solitaire and Facebook time. I quietly grumble for a few minutes before I leave for the library. I see one of the NYSC lawyers (junior yeah!).

‘Hi!’
Maybe the greeting was too enthusiastic but it is hard to restrain my joy at a camel to dump work on.

‘Hello’.

‘So, what are you working on? Which is ‘polite-speak’ for ‘you don’t seem busy’.

‘Nothing really. I haven’t really done much work since we resumed. ‘

Perfect! It’s hard to wipe the grin from my face.

‘So, would you like to work on [the ‘interesting’ matter]?’

‘That is what I wrote my long essay on!’

She is excited. I am thrilled. The poor child is yet to learn.

‘I assume you are interested?’

‘Of course!’

She finishes in five hours, I review it for two. Work is done and turned in to Posh-Tall with a flourish.

Sometimes, I overwhelm myself. Most times, I am just lucky but who is counting?

Crackberry

2009-12-22T16:21:00.000Z

Crackberry

One of the associates has an annoying Blackberry addiction – and my upset has nothing to do with the fact that I can’t afford one. It really didn’t annoy me until recently, with little work to do and counsel are engaged in bonding and building friendships. BB addict will divert attention to himself, in the middle of poolroom gossip and scurry to the phone like he was paid for reading messages or that the message would self-destruct in two seconds. Everyone knows lawyers like to hear themselves speak without interruption, whether in court or in the pool room. I am a lawyer, so go figure.

BB addict apparently takes his habit home with him. I mistakenly overheard him complaining to Groveller at lunch that his wife accused him of Tiger-resque tendencies, because he was always fiddling on his phone. He took some time whining about how work took so much of his time and how absolutely impossible it would be to play at Tiger, (even if he wanted to) because of the workload etc. All through his lunch therapy, he was fiddling with his phone. Groveller is too diplomatic to point out the obvious reasons for his wife’s suspicions.

Happy Christmas! May Your Days Be Long

2009-12-21T08:29:00.000Z

Lagbaja, Tamedo & Co., my salary-payer and the 8-6 time-spender does not close shop during the holidays. Apart from the official Christmas Day and the first day of the New Year, which we are grudgingly allowed to spend as we like, we remain open, with hands consistently on the plough, through the days before and between our free-days. All responsible legal practitioners know that the Clauses rely on our essential and crucial legal services to keep the elves hard at work and shield them from employer’s liability or scorn for labour rights. We also protect Mr. Santa from those nasty animal rights activists who may attempt to prevent the ‘tireless’ reindeer from flying every year without pay or time off. More importantly, our clueless clients would surely suffer a heart attack and definitely die if we dare keep away from work during the festivities. We think it’s convenient to have clients alive and paying the bills. Prostate matters don’t pay as well as real businesses.

So, we stay here dedicated to justice, fairness and billable hours. We are responsible, like that. Unfortunately, our best laid ideals have largely failed since we haven’t been doing a lot of work. Besides the enjoyable gossip and Facebook, I haven’t really done much work. Gloater and three other associates are suspiciously ill and are not coming to work.

Despite these reasons and many more (which I am sure I can find), I am far from disgruntled. I am into being happy and the spirit of all that is merry, good and glittering. I also hear salaries will be paid before Friday, the 25th, which also makes life beautiful.

Happy Christmas!

Felas Women as Psuedo-feminists? Come on!

2009-12-17T11:37:00.001Z

Fela’s wives were co-fighters in the fight against ‘the corrupt African government’
I like the fact that we celebrate our dead heroes. While recognition is good for those whose hearts still thump, remembering the dead comes to me as recognition of their art and usually devoid sycophancy. In this regard, I salute Najite’s perspective of Fela!, the Broadway musical.
I am however cynical (maybe a little prejudiced but how well can a non-Nigerian tell a Nigerian story? Eh? For instance, while I respect Karl Maier’s journalistic objectivity and integrity, I can’t get past the factual inaccuracies (admittedly slight) and the errors in interpretation in his ‘This House Has Fallen’.
Africa tells Africa’s story best - Chinua Achebe’s ‘Things Fall Apart’ and many more; Chiamanda’s ‘Half of a Yellow Sun’; Ngugi wa Thiong’o’s ‘Weep Not Child’; Samuel Johnson’s ‘The History of the Yorubas’ Oginda Odinga’s ‘Not Yet Uhuru’; etc.

I think it’s an attempt to retell art. Someone (interpret as: ‘Nigerian’) should rewrite Fela as it is.

Rocking Rookie

2009-12-07T17:21:00.003Z

Dear Rookie Reader,

I know I haven't been updating my blog since it was available elsewhere.

I apologise. From now on, Rookie will also be here and on paper.

I'll also post unpublishable rantings here.

No work No Work!

2009-12-03T16:33:00.000Z

No work! I’m catching up on sleep and Nollywood.

‘Cunny Man Die, Cunny Man Bury Am’

2009-12-02T11:32:00.000Z

‘Counsel, are you sure you want to move this motion?’
Counsel is two seats away from me but that does not stop him from placing three legal dictionaries between me and the judge and four volumes of Sasegbon in front of the other lawyer next to me. Fairly enough, he can barely see over the law reports supported by a bulky file in front of him. I am far from upset at his intrusive obstruction since it nicely shields my novel from the bench.

‘Yes, My Lord. The matter is slated for hearing of our motion.’
The court is eyeing the lawyer’s threatening mini-library cum artillery. His Lordship tries again –

‘And you say it is an oral application?’

Everyone knows that prospects of an oral application are less threatening with implied brevity – in simple English: bring down the court’s guards by hiding the bulky reports under the table. Bulky Counsel seems clueless.

‘Yes, My Lord, it will take a maximum of thirty minutes’.
He just made it worse. Thirty minutes of writing is enough to terrorise any judge even on the day before a long weekend.
‘Counsel will file a written address. Matter is adjourned to ...’
‘As your Lordship pleases.’

On our way out, Bulky Counsel – Muktar – winks at Gloater and I. Muktar had gambled on ‘convincing’ the court to give him another adjournment without having to ask for it. Our witness had gone AWOL and the Court had threatened to dismiss our matter at the last adjourned date. With the witness still AWOL; Muktar filed some flimsy motion intending to withdraw it at the next adjourned date.

Lawyers are evil. Very Evil.

Something I Heard from Someone Who Heard from Someone Else

2009-12-01T14:33:00.000Z

I’m usually one to proclaim belief in the capacity of the human ability to adapt itself to surmount any circumstances. I however never envisioned His Lordship in his scarlet splendour literally behind the bench.
Caveat: These thoughts revolve around bits of gossip I heard from someone who heard it from someone else and far from being a participant in mindless gossip, I only listened since it would have been rude to ignore the story provider. The point is – this story is absolutely a discredited inadmissible yet irresistible hearsay. Really! Here goes:
Locus I hear, was in a court in one of the states in the ‘South-South’, the conservative term for the Niger-Delta. The court was hearing evidence from a ‘dangerously looking’ (not my words) accused person, when a series of loud bangs were heard. My informant swears that the original storyteller said that the noise sounded like the AK-47s bandied in Rambo and Independence Day. In any case, it must have been threatening enough for His Lordship to seek protection under the solid wooden barriers of the bench.
A few minutes later, the (apparently brave) court orderly discovered that the noise was caused by fireworks, the popular ‘banger’ used by children. The culprits were not found so there was no talk of contempt charges.

‘Hardworking’ is the Civil Euphemism for ‘Stupid’

2009-11-30T15:25:00.000Z

My weekend was short. No I was not working. My usually slothful Sunday evening was stolen by a ‘young lawyer’, who is also good friend of mine who wanted me to play Agony Rookie. I wasn’t that upset – what is better than using my Nollywood movie time to save a soul? *insert other beneficent expressions*.

My friend spent the better time of my evening complaining about how he was overworked at his law firm; how annoying it felt to intensively research and yet not get a whiff of the juicy litigation bits; and how he felt close to victimised and bullied by his seniors. Just last Friday, a senior associate assigned a thick file to him to prepare the notice of appeal, which ‘must’ be filed by Monday.
The poor naive child.
I mentally adjusted my halo as I castigated him for being ungrateful of the capacity to complain about a job and even work to do in ‘these credit crunched times’. Besides everyone knows that junior associates are recruited for their ability to work as law-donkeys and far from victimised, he amounts to a mere statistic in the thousands slugging their way up the ladder at law factories over the world.
After about twenty minutes of continuous reiteration of his good luck at being ‘chosen’ to play donkey and making shameless analogies to the clichéd half-full glass; he naively believed me, said ‘thank you’; with renewed thoughts of being the ‘good associate’.
Of course, I felt superior-ly secure in my good deed. I didn’t mention my thoughts - only thick people get assigned files thick enough to warrant charges of torture and cruel punishment to trees. With a little time my friend would learn that expression about working smart not hard should be taken at its literal best and he would hone his expertise of toeing the fine line between hardworking and lazy. It’s a lesson to be learned first hand.

Friday: When the Tom Cat is Away, the Other Cats Play with Their Food

2009-10-02T20:24:00.000+01:00

Posh-tall, Grey Stripes and Muktar are off to the International Bar Association conference in Madrid. The firm meeting is chaired by Groveller, who seems to be unable to get over the fact that we all have to listen to him, speak. After four hours of bickering and needless expounding of the law, Groveller finally lets us off.
Oh dear.

Thursday’s Thoughts: No Thoughts

2009-10-01T08:24:00.000+01:00

No work!
I really absolutely love this country.
Happy Birthday, Nigeria. Thank you for the day off too.

And...

2009-09-30T20:23:00.000+01:00

I hear Law School results are out today. That is one thing I am excited about – not worrying if I wrote right, not having to review my blood pressure, not wondering if my life will change forever after the resultsor other dramatic thoughts.
All the best to the ‘younger ones’ (yes, I absolutely lurve saying that!).
One advice though – there really is nothing you can do now. Brace yourselves. There are bad times ahead – slugging it out at the bottom, learning and being bossed around. Ha.

Wednesday’s Thoughts: Up the Rung, Officially.

2009-09-30T10:39:00.000+01:00

There is something which I had been waiting for the appropriate non-dramatic moment to proclaim, I had planned to ‘accidentally’ slip it into a line or a gripe themed on the need to ‘mentor the younger ones’ or join in the general decry of the falling standard of education and how good lawyers were rare to come by these days... something carelessly mentioned in the as lawyers say, ‘course of business’.
That thing is – I AM NOW OFFICIALLY SOMEONE ELSE’S SENIOR!!!
I feel like another word for glee, like the EFCC Chairman after the Attorney General signed the fiat to prosecute the Famous Five.
After spending one year scrapping my way at the bottom of the ladder, trudging heavy files, being the one to do the dirty annoying work, generally slugging it all out for oxygen with the life beneath the ladder among other revolting activities, the firm has employed a newer wig aka junior at the bar aka rookier rookie aka bully-worthy material, among other adjectives. Finally, I take one step up the rung of the ladder, earning the right to superciliously refer work to someone else and more importantly, never ever take minutes!
Of course, I am thrilled.
I started sharpening my Draco tendencies this morning by ‘delegating’ a long overdue file audit to rookier A, whose pseudonym I have not managed to think of. He just finished with NYSC from a state in the South-South and has not yet exhausted the overall eagerness of a mind fed on Grishams and The Practice, which works for me.

Tuesday’s Thoughts: Kidney Transplants and Rookie Lawyers

2009-09-29T14:11:00.000+01:00

‘Would you ask a fresh faced doctor, like the ones in Grey’s Anatomy who gets bullied by everyone, from nurse to consultant, about a kidney transplant?’
That was (or was meant to be) a rhetorical statement, heralding my gripe for the work dumped on my table, this fine Tuesday morning. Just as I finished typo-checking Muktar’s work, one of the office assistants, brought a file to me, with Posh-tall’s calligraphy – ‘Prepare the opinion’.
It is a matter I am sure I don’t know anything about – something on mining rights. I had to run a spell-check on ‘mining’ since I wasn’t even sure how many ‘n’s it had! One the one hand, I am thrilled at the prospect of learning something new, on the other, I worry about the prospects of advising on contracts worth my yearly salary in American dollars.

Monday’s thoughts: Why We Should At least Think About Killing All the Lawyers.

2009-09-28T18:19:00.000+01:00

Theoretically, arbitration is an alternative form of resolving disputes and lawyering without drawn daggers. Therefore, in textbooks and manuals, they save time; are less expensive and more flexible, and lead to amicable resolution of conflicts among other laudable attributes, unattainable by the regular litigious courts. The ideal arbitral tribunal would resolve issues faster with a judge whose knowledge on the matter would fill a mile high text and parties would continue to live happily ever after.
Yeah.
Whoever thought about this idea must have underestimated the power of ‘true’ legal training, where the better lawyer contests every fact including the shade of the sun on the date the agreement was first thought about, and has countless skills in frustrating the matter by repeated adjournments. A ‘proper lawyer’ knows that settlement is for losers and will ridicule any attempt to reach a solution that does not involve total destruction of the opponent – why preach when we can do carnage and destruction and get paid for it?
At least those are most the lessons I may be learning from law practice. Ghandi and I are handling a six-year old arbitral matter. It used to be handled by another firm until the client debriefed the first firm and handed it over to ours last month. While reading through the case file, I discovered that parties had actually decided to settle about four and a half years ago but after some exchange of correspondence, ‘settlement had broken down’, a synonym for a much longer winded phrase – the-lawyers-would-not-settle-since-settling-would-mean-a-lower-percentage-for-fees.
Due to the limitation laws, the award may not even be enforceable since the agreement was not ‘under seal’ or by deed – which is another formality which rationale still eludes my ignorant self.
Don’t we all love the law and the ass?

Thursday’s Thoughts: Heard in Court

2009-09-17T16:33:00.001+01:00

Counsel A: ‘My Lord, I am afraid that I would have to ask for an adjournment as my lead counsel is unavoidably absent as he had gone on lesser Hajj.’
I know that counsel A’s lead counsel has not gone on lesser Hajj but is in Dubai for an extended vacation. I know that because the lead counsel is Muktar, one of the senior associates at the firm and I am Counsel A. I just lied. There goes yet another piece of my soul to the Devil.
*Sniff*

Wednesday’s Thoughts: Holidays are over

2009-09-16T11:29:00.000+01:00

Wednesday’s Thoughts: Holidays are over!
Did I mention this? Vacation is over? Lawyers are once again being friendly to court clerks; everyone is tipping the court's security; there’s increased acrimony as interns are complaining about having to carry heavy files; seniors are issuing memos to express their displeasure over badly written briefs; everything is back to normal.

Tuesday’s Thoughts: Client is King?

2009-09-15T13:12:00.000+01:00

Usually, I try to assure myself of my unending patience and love for the world. At this time of my life, ‘my world’ is the law office and usually includes clients who pay the bills to keep the law office open. This means I am a whole lot more restrained with clients than Kanye West at the VMA or Serena Williams at an annoying line judge. Recently, I have been dealing with a client who has deeply shaken my illusions of sainthood (a different client from the one who went volte face for the amendments on Monday). This one is another horror client nightmare, like the type law school teachers warned us about. Last week, he sent at least a dozen emails on Monday and another dozen on Wednesday to clarify a point that was clearer than rice paper. Today, I spent forty minutes trying to convince him to sign an affidavit. After we got past the fact that he did not have to actually go to court and take oath before the commissioner for oaths, I had to explain every line of the affidavit to him. Then he had me reprinting the affidavit since he insisted that I insert the word ‘JP’ after his name like it was a national honour.
After another bit of pacifying, he finally signed it and left the office. Ghandi suggests that I sent a bill on an hourly rate and request for a deposit on account. I intend to.

Monday’s Thoughts: Kill the Trees; Use lots of paper.

2009-09-14T15:27:00.000+01:00

Lawyers like a lot of paper. The official reason for our love for treecide is the need to keep proper records. Paper serves as evidence when integrity of a gentleman’s agreement fails. Instances abound - paper may be the reason why everyone knows that a loan was given without adequate collateral and why committees to probe fraud are caught in fraudulent acts.
However, I have discovered sundry uses of paper. Ordinarily looking paper, in the right volume, bound in branded (sober looking, of course) jackets can be transformed into a high-utility courtroom accessory. Better still, since few have the patience to read through more than ten lines without their minds wandering to lunch, papers, when filled with appropriate multiple words, provide a ready logical excuse to bill more – the client is impressed at the amount of ‘industry’ gone into filling the sheets with ink, the lawyer’s ego is massaged at the amount of paper he has filled; everyone is happy and the world is one step closer to world peace.
Flowing from my inherent goodness and strong determination to be a ‘good lawyer’, which in my mind, is a mix between Ayo Obe and the late Gani; and my strong love for the use of technology supported by my lack of aptitude (read: laziness) for carrying anything heavier than my phone and flash drive; all clothed in my belief in the inherent integrity of all, I have scorned such underhand moves *insert additional self righteous phrases* of filling paper for less than what is right and true.
At least until today. My paper phobia almost put me into some trouble. I have been working on an agreement with a client who would instruct and reinstruct by telephone. Usually, I’ll send an email to restate her verbal instructions for record purposes. Some time during negotiations, the other party requested for certain amendments to the agreement, which I discussed with the client by telephone. It was mainly a commercial decision and after I explained the consequences to the client, she agreed to incorporate these amendments. Perhaps, she did not think it through. For some silly and probably lazy reason, I did not send a letter. Just as we were about to forward the final copy of the agreement for execution, Posh-tall had the good sense to question a particular clause. She calls the client by telephone. After two minutes of explaining the consequences of the clause to the client, the client claims that I never mentioned the clause to her.
Posh tall is wise enough to realise the client may not have been truthful but blames me for not having a written commitment. She is quite right.
Lesson to learn: baring any invasion of cockroaches, the paper will outlast us all.

Are our Heroes better off dead?

2009-09-11T11:58:00.000+01:00

I tried to vote Gani in 2003. I only tried because after four hours at the polling booth, something told me that between my one vote and the thugs who were also waiting for the electoral officers; the latter were more likely to be that last snowflake for the electoral avalanche. I however still rooted for Gani, from the safe confines of my house and grieved when he lost, like I would also later grieve for another preferred candidate in the 2007 elections.
I also liked what Gani for what he did for ‘lawyer’ image – knowledgeable human rights activist.

The point is – I have some history with the late Gani and I have a reason to grieve. What I can’t fathom is the sudden love and adoration for a man who was underappreciated while alive. Everyone at work is saying something about the loss of Gani and its impact on the Nigerian legal sector. I find it weird that even Groveller and Muktar who used to scorn Gani’s law reports are close to suggesting he be made a saint of law reporting. Perhaps we prefer our heroes when they are dead and buried and far away from troubling our consciences.

Kill the Lawyers?

2009-09-10T14:15:00.000+01:00

In Nigeria, briefing a lawyer in a dispute usually signifies war or at least the recognition of armed conflict and burning of any hint of a white flag. Yet, lawyers make a lot of money causing trouble and pretending to fix it. Whoever decided on the smart idea of arbitration as a substitute to litigation, clearly failed to carry out research in the Nigerian legal sector. Ghandi has been working on some arbitral matter. From the case file, arbitration was initiated three years ago when the other party failed to meet its obligations to pay for the maintenance of a ship due to cash flow problems. To my ordinary pedestrian mind, the problems could have been sorted out with staggered payments, and the debt would have been amortised over time. The lawyers did not think so – why allow peace and joy when we can make cause a little more trouble?

Occupational Hazards?

2009-09-09T11:34:00.000+01:00

‘Hello sir?’
‘Hello my dear!’
‘My dear’ is said with an arm draped over Totally-Together-Chick’s right shoulder. I almost don’t notice the typical Nigerian patronising honorific. Then again, a number of old big bellied clients assume they are witty, funny and ‘my dear’ is an extension of their undeniable charm. Many of us don’t agree but live with the harmless illusion – after all, we get practice by laughing at partners’ really dry jokes. In fact, having to laugh at dry jokes is better and more dignified than being expected to make coffee by some client.
TTC looks a little startled as she moves away from the offending arm from her shoulder and looks like she’s contemplating whether an arm on her shoulder was sufficient provocation to clumsily spill her black coffee on the client’s white agbada. Ghandi notices ‘the move’ and my discomfort and smoothly steps in between TTC and the white agbada, thereby doing his good deed for the day and keeping the world from TTC’s ire.
I try hard but my smile shines through. White agabda notices my amusement. All through the meeting, I add the honorific ‘sir’ to every sentence to assure him of my deference and acknowledgement of his stature and superiority, etc, and keep my shoulder far far away.

Shhh... I like it!

2009-09-07T15:38:00.000+01:00

For all my gripe; dramatic grumbling and ranting, I like being a lawyer. Everyone assumes you do something really important and like a true Nigerian, I like the implied ‘do you know you I am?’ when I strut in the banking hall on my way from court, with my collarette ‘accidentally’, peeping under my sharp black suit. I like the new looks of awe and respect on the faces of family friends, who knew me when a handkerchief was the size of all the clothes I needed, and the bullying big aunties who terrorised me at children’s church years ago. Now, I get to play pretty big stuff and they have to listen! I like it most when people call me to ask for free legal advice and the glee I feel when I say ‘the law does not allow it’.
No matter how much we complain and whinge about the law and long hours; the illusions of self importance that comes with passing Law School sometimes makes up for it. Better still, few people have any idea about what first-year associates really do – take minutes until fingers ache, write letters to clients informing them that the court did not sit again, get harassed for mistakes no one wants to take the blame for, carry out annoying research for a brief you’ll probably never see, review agreements with the sole aim of spotting typos and nothing else. That is close to state secret. Of course, I don’t intend to tell anyone either.

Lofty Heights

2009-06-19T14:33:00.000+01:00

We are in a conference with some clients – ‘we’ is Posh-Tall, Grey-stripes, Prof. and I... and a new-er wig (yes, I am ageist!)
Slowly but surely, I am moving from note-taker to note-taker’s supervisor. The note-taking position has been delegated to a new lawyer undergoing the NYSC programme with Lagbaja, Tamedo & Co. Of course, I’m nice and sweet and far from using my lofty position on a few inches above the ladder unfairly.
Clients are a ‘society-lady’ (magazines make it sound like a job) and her son. She’s a young widow, with no source of livelihood (unless you count continent-hopping and gold-wearing). Her Lagos big boy (another job, I guess) husband died recently leaving his heirs and hangers-on at the mercy of angry creditors and no will. The creditor-banks are jointly claiming against his assets.
Grey-stripes thinks that since the loan was taken by a company formed by the deceased person, there might be a chance of salvaging some of the late man’s assets and leaving something for the family. I am actually sorry for her – she’s seems hopeless, the kind of people the law should protect despite their ignorance.

Fun stuff

2009-06-11T15:44:00.000+01:00

Muktar wants a legal opinion on the claims against Tobacco Manufacturing. We will be meeting with its legal secretary tomorrow at a Chinese restaurant. TM will be sent a bill of charges, with an item for ‘meeting with your good self’ or something similar. I love the part where you get paid for fun stuff.

More Honesty When You (Don't) Need It

2009-06-09T13:25:00.000+01:00

It’s the simple, rarely varied ‘adopt-your-statement’ question. Counsel asks, ‘Did you make this statement?’ Witness says a ‘yes’, then the other side gets a go at the witness’ jugular, while pretending to cross-examine.
Counsel rarely screams the ‘80s movie’s ‘Objection My Lord!’ anymore as the witness’ statement on oath is filed along with other originating process. In practice, the statement is usually drafted by the lawyer (who was taught to put facts ‘favourably’ at Law School), though the crux of the statement is the witness’. Most witnesses sign the prepared statement without reading it and forget about it, some ummh and aahh over every word just in case the lawyer is a conspiracy theorist, few scan-read and sign. Today’s witness is a ‘most’.
The matter is for trial for the first time after four years of pre-trial, extensions and transfer from judge to judge. The Defendant had served an interlocutory application on us a few weeks ago. Ghandi suspects it’s another attempt to stall the trial but comes to court anyway with the client (and sole witness). We are not prepared for trial and we are surprised when the Defendant withdraws his pending interlocutory application and the Court decides to proceed to trial
Ghandi tries to ask for an adjournment but her Ladyship is ‘not inclined to’ and orders that our witness be sworn in and adopt his statement.
Proficient Ghandi begins, ‘Did you make this statement?’
Surprise -
Witness looks at the first page, then, ‘No.’
Ghandi pretends not to hear the ‘no’; Defendant’s Counsel is chuckling and I’m trying all the body language I know without throwing a stone at his head.
Ghandi tries again- ‘Mr, [Witness], you will remember you made a statement at our office…’
Counsel to the Defendant jumps off, emphasising that the witness had already answered the question; Ghandi interjects, explaining that the witness is not prepared, etc, while I develop a headache. They squabble for a few minutes before the judge magnanimously adjourns.

Streaks and Honesty

2009-06-09T08:09:00.000+01:00

Streaks and Honesty
I’m barely one step in the lobby when Senior chuckles-
‘Nice design Rookie’
I am thinking - ‘Oh, well, well of course, I always look nice…’ then I realise it’s a plain white shirt that didn’t have any designs when I ironed it - And Senior will rather choke on a bitter-leaf stalk mixed with bird droppings, than say something nice about me.
Lekki-British eye-points to the huge stain on my shirt and at the second my neck turns; I know that the diagonal dirt streaks on my shirt are from the bus seat. Typically, I must have plunked down on the seat with no thoughts to wipe the seat down.
I’m a firm BRT-lover with queues that mean you don’t have to literally catch the bus. It’s also mostly time-effective when it finally shows up and ‘time-effective’ means I get an extra hour of sleep - which generally puts me in a good mood and reduces my caffeine cravings by one cup.
Today’s not one of my ‘Go-BRT!’ days though.

Aside

2009-06-06T14:36:00.000+01:00

just last week, I was reading on the world’s top hundred law offices, not like I‘m ‘materialistic’ and the figures firms earned sort of jumped at me. (Interpret - All my drudgery will soon pay off in rich and famous terms.)

Weekend Hours

2009-06-06T11:28:00.000+01:00

I’m at work on a Saturday morning...

*Insert: eh ya, do, pele, sannu, sorry or other suitable empathetic murmur in any language*
(I’m shameless like that)

To be fair, no one actually told me to use up my luxury hours, sitting on the same chair I sit on Mondays through Fridays but ‘no one’ also explained how I’ll draft a brief of Argument for a matter when Grey-stripes (yes, the RMD-look-alike partner is back) sent the file on Friday afternoon, with ‘Send in by Tuesday’ on the red post-it attached to the file.
Of course, I smiled and emailed something nice and sweet about being thankful for the opportunity etc and just about everything I didn’t mean.
Anyways, I’m stuck here for the weekend in the ‘pursuit of knowledge’ and ‘professorial research’. I’m getting a feel of contradictory Court of Appeal decisions and deciding on which the direction I want to flog the law.

Precedents

2009-06-05T15:18:00.001+01:00

Posh-Tall is back. She went to the IBA conference and spent a week in Brazil.
She looks over Clara’s originating process, makes a few edits and asks me to file.
…
I see Freckles at lunch. My crush’s gone but I figure it will do some good chatting over the meal, so I share his table.
We get talking while I wait for lunch. He’s on a matter whose judge has been transferred to another division. There’s a subsisting order mandating the defendant to pay the judgement sum to the court’s account. Since the matter is to start de novo, the defendants claim they are no longer under any obligation to pay the amount.
The law is that a trial de novo wipes the slate clean - all previous actions taken on the matter are deemed of no consequence and trial starts anew. What seems unclear is the status of interlocutory injunctions. The practical effect of wiping the slate clean is that where for instance, a Mareva injunction has been granted, the party against whom the order was granted can move the assets from the jurisdiction of the court.

So much for precedents.

Miss-Road

2009-06-04T11:17:00.000+01:00

The file has several correspondence addressed to ‘The Registrar, Commercial Division, Ikeja’. Logically, I assume the court was in Ikeja and don’t think to ask anyone.
At 8.30am, I am in the court premises, skirt suit sharp, heels at right height, bib tucked in to hint at dignity, the only thing missing is my gown floundering in the wind, but it’s with my wig in my stylish carry-all. After a few minutes of walking about trying to find the court, I ask another wig that looks like me.-
‘Oh. That’s in TBS’
Yourba-accented ‘Eh?’
‘I mean the Commercial Division of the Lagos State High Court.
‘Yes, they use the building at TBS’
He hurries away and I am sweating.
I rush to ask another lawyer whose confirmation makes me wish I am incapable of secreting bodily fluids through thick skin.
My heels are uncomfortable now but I run out and grab a cab.
By some miracle, traffic on Third Mainland Bridge is light and I get to TBS at about 10am. Miracle two - Court has not sat.
I decide not to mention one word at the office - some incidents are best kept hush-hush.

Gavel is Might

2009-06-03T13:28:00.000+01:00

Counsel on the other side’s wig is a dirty blond and he’s been referring to me as his learned colleague although he’s not able to hide his derision at my shiny one. Worse, I have just referred to third party as second defendant and he’s quick to correct me.
Ummph.
The judge who is newly appointed is not amused at counsel’s condescending behaviour. Motion is for stay of proceedings while he appeals the earlier ruling against interlocutory injunction. I think counsel’s upset that the earlier application for interlocutory application was refused based on a shoddy application and unintelligible arguments. He must have delegated it to a junior and did not check it before it was filed.
Today, he’s decided to do the job himself and is not doing much with his impatience and lack of decorum. Usually, the court will allow counsel to move on the terms of the already submitted written argument but the judge is not willing to let it slide so quickly and easily. After about twenty minutes of spit and arguing, the order is refused. Ha.

Having and Giving

2009-06-02T16:25:00.000+01:00

I am still working on the project finance agreement from yesterday, when my phone rings. I’m using Mode9’s ‘Regular Guy’ for my ring tone and I usually let it ring for a while before I take the call. This time it’s an old friend and I take the call without the ringing ritual that annoys whoever is next to me.
She’s perfect for my ‘sore ears’.
‘Hey Girrrrllllllllllll!’
I am excited but can’t scream properly so I make do with some quiet ‘Heeey!’ before we attempt a minute of girlie catch up.
She’s ‘NYSC-ing’ somewhere in Kogi and just finished Law School.
‘So how were the results?’
‘Umm, they gave me a pass o.’
-Naturally, in Nigeria, you ‘make’ a First or Second Class Upper but they ‘give’ you anything lower.
My friend’s really smart and we can’t understand why she graduated with a pass. I try to say something nice and ‘exhorting’ but she’s past that.
She’s serving in a bank now and thinks her chances of leaving for law practice just got dimmer. A Law School Pass means she’ll have to be slimmer than the eye of a needle to get into the top law firms that pay well.
I try to convince her on the ‘worthiness’ of law, the career prospects, etc, but I suspect she’s not buying into humble pupilage years.
We agree to meet when she comes to town.

Lawyer Myth

2009-06-01T06:15:00.000+01:00

Movie myth - lawyers are sharp, suave, never hassled in their dark suits and speak Project-Fame-Judge style to an often bespectacled judge.
Grisham novel myth - lawyers make lots of money being experienced investigators and often have some lackey in the background to do all the ‘dirty’ research work, while they see clients and spend a few minutes reinforcing the Judge’s opinion of their erudition and inherent smartness.
Grouchy Client’s myth - there’s no point in paying legal fees since lawyers only have to do a copy-and-paste using precedents.

Real life - Everything takes time and ‘everything’ includes out-of-court matters. Going to law school buys a lifetime of research. Even core barrister work is hinged on the pleadings and that takes hours or days of research. Solicitor’s work is worse; one missed single seemingly innocuous line may bring trouble years later when the parties are not so business-gentlemanly.
No, I am not complaining. I actually enjoy spending hours straining my pretty eye-shadowed eyes at prints that do not appreciate the time and drama it takes to get the eye shadow right!
-Making a draft of an agreement on project finance. I’m not half way done. Grouch.

Evidence 101

2009-05-28T12:28:00.000+01:00

It’s an EFCC matter involving forgery of cheques and Counsel-Bully (CB) Bully is for the defendant. CB is one of those TV lawyers whose faces are better remembered than their names. His derisive cross-examination is reputed to have witnesses having a go at his fat layered neck.
‘Are you familiar with cheques and how to detect their authenticity?’
‘Well, relatively…’
CB jumps at this, he can’t wait to ‘tear the witness’ apart.
‘Oh, merely relatively eh? I P-U-T it to you that you are an ignorant officer who wants to destroy my client’s reputation’ (‘put’ comes with some spit)
He looks like the cat who found the cream and is about to start rolling on the floor.
‘I was about to say that I have attended courses on cheque cloning and fraud detection at Switzerland and in Germany. I just came back from the IMF-sponsored six month programme at The Hague solely dedicated to international fraud detection and preventive practices.’
CB must have skipped Evidence 101 - Never ask a question if you don’t know the answer.
‘Oh, so you have enough theoretical experience, eh?’
He actually winks at his client in the dock.
Too late -
‘I was with the Institute for Security Studies, South Africa for two years, then moved to the Interpol for six years where I was team leader in halting the attempt to flood the UAE with fake dinars. I also…’
‘That’s okay! This honourable Court does not need your life history!’
The Bar was in stitches.
Some moments just make it worth it.

Later

2009-05-27T16:08:00.000+01:00

If I were not particularly humble, I’ll say I also have additional psychic powers.
SAN-hound just served us with a motion to amend his writ and originating process - he wants to increase the stakes.
Of course, ‘we’ won’t allow it.

‘While you were sleeping’

2009-05-27T12:39:00.000+01:00

Apparently, Ghandi and the Prof have been at igniting some sparks while I was sleeping - figuratively of course- there is absolutely no way I‘ll fall asleep while reading a three-foot high pile of documents on some topic I have absolutely no interest in...
Back to the issue, upon due investigation, I verily believe that there’s something going on. They seem to think no one sees their side-long glances and furtive glances at each. Agony-Aunt Rookie sees everything!

‘Over-skill’

2009-05-26T12:39:00.000+01:00

Ghandi and I are in court to get the stamp of approval on a consent order. It’s taken the better part of four hours to review the file and I have come to one conclusion - No good intentions or speedier and more efficient rules can stop determined ‘Spartans’.
For eleven years, both sides have fought tooth and nail wanting to get the better of each other on a piece of land they probably didn’t want as badly as each other’s throat. They wanted war, blood and victory- in that order. With endless motions to the Supreme Court and back and aided by adjournments and de novos, they have managed to make their lawyers richer.
Finally, after millions on solicitor’s fees they have finally agreed to a settlement, containing the same terms that were suggested at the very beginning.
Our matter is the third on the cause list right after some entertainment -
‘Milady, the defendant just served us with his statement of defence yesterday, leaving us no time to respond. In fact, I had to rush from the Court of Appeal today’
Claimant’s counsel is convincingly wounded. He’s Chief-something and has a ‘listen-to-me’ voice. Regrettably, I have learnt that lawyers know how to tell a story so I can’t (lack the ability to) believe him, but at least he has some of my empathy.
Her Ladyship also seems sympathetic. The Counsel for the matter before this one had appeared without his file. I can sense she’s itching to teach someone a lesson.
‘Counsel for the defendant?’
The other lawyer looks uncomfortable and is about to go on some long-winded tale; ‘My Lord, actually…’
Chief Listen-to-me voice interjects-
‘Milady, I am asking for costs - after all, I am VIP!’
Chief just ‘over-skill’ed.
I think Her Ladyship agrees thinks that was an over-kill and simply ignores Chief and tells them to pick a date for adjournment.

Again

2009-05-25T10:08:00.000+01:00

Matter after mine is a gardener who has been in custody for seven weeks because a policeman picked him up at 6.15am on his way to a client’s.
His offence - he was with a machete and ‘had to be OPC.’

Visual Assault

2009-05-25T08:54:00.000+01:00

I’m at the Magistrate Court and everything is as unhurried and deliberate as a funeral - Uggh!
Finally, our matter gets called. Then the lights go out. After another unhurried break, court sits and our matter is adjourned for mention next month.
I am a bit miffed but really, who cares if I am?
Good thing about Magistrate Courts is that counsel are not as formally dressed as in the High Courts. Unfortunately, it also means there’s no robe to hide visual assault. Today, there’s a lawyer wearing gold-coloured shoes that match the weaves glued to her dark hair and huge silver earrings.

Injunctions and Lawyering

2009-05-24T19:05:00.000+01:00

I have some friends over and as social cohabitants are prone to, one has a row with another. The wannabe-comic among them quotes the biblical injunction about not letting the sun set on one’s anger.
And rather than some pious thought along the lines of praying for the sinner’s mortal soul, my first thought is getting the ‘client’ off the hook on technical grounds!
‘Technically, since it’s already evening, she has been overreached and the injunction cannot take effect.’
I have to remind myself again that weekends are for hibernating and nothing remotely linked to a wig. Weekends are for sleep, slob, Church, see friends who have forgotten that I don’t go to see them, ‘project fame’ (reality TV and a little gossip always does some good), and more sleep… generally.

*Makes note to self-learn to enjoy a joke without lawyer thoughts*

Inherent Goodness in Woman-kind

2009-05-22T12:14:00.000+01:00

Ghandi and I are chatting (gossiping) when the intercom buzzes. It’s Plain-short.
‘Rookie, can I see you in my office now?’
Seating next Plain-short is a ‘miracle’.
Resplendent in aso-ebi (uniform Ankara) is our divorce petitioner (the one that wants N70M for her dog) with her respondent husband. They are batting eyelashes at each other and holding hands like teenagers, although it looks more like one of them has a jelly-spine in need of support.
She wants to withdraw the petition. It turns out their differences were not so irreconcilable.
The N70M puppy? She’s already sent it to her brother ‘who has time to take care of it’!

The Lawyer

2009-05-21T17:22:00.000+01:00

I am editing Clara’s statement of claim. Copyright issues can be unpredictable and clumsy to prove. As Posh-Tall said, Clara’s matter is not piracy where we can use the Anton Piller to confiscate pirated works. Here, we have to prove that the film producer did not create the play independently. Fortunately, Clara had asked the producer’s assistant to sign an acceptance slip when she dropped it. We intend to use it to show that Clara actually gave him some material.
‘We’… I feel like a lawyer.

Piece of the Pie

2009-05-21T15:12:00.000+01:00

I’ve just finished lunch when I stop over at Muktar’s. I wish I hadn’t.
More trouble - TMC has been served with another set of originating processes similar to those we want to settle with SAN-hound. The claimants also want retirement bonus for being loyal cigarette customers for eighteen years. They are asking for about five times as much as SAN-hound’s damages.
I suspect SAN-hound is greedy enough to want to amend his writ and pleadings to increase his client’s claim. Muktar is thinking about damage control. He doesn’t want to be the guard on duty when the ants finish off the carcass.
‘We will respond to their originating process.’
Muktar wants to call their bluff, he thinks they can’t handle the litigation and will only be pressured to settle.
He hands over the already bulky file.
Aaagh! I enjoy law practice blah blah blah.... but when do I get enough free boring me-time?

More sad news

2009-05-20T17:22:00.000+01:00

My aunty calls on my way back to my cubicle.
‘I am tired of all these o!’
She sounds worse than the last time we spoke. She’d gone to the Land Planning Board like I advised her to. Though, the governor’s consent was obtained along with other required formalities before her Certificate of Occupancy was issued, she was told that her house was built on land, originally designated as part of a road network. The officer in charge promised to ‘look into’ her case.
She’ll go back next week.

Sad Wednesday

2009-05-20T14:15:00.000+01:00

We have an emergency meeting. Big Oga’s nephew was buried yesterday. Nephew left work late because he wanted to wait out the traffic. His girlfriend had been looking for him until last Saturday when the car washed up the Lagoon at Ebute Metta. Nephew’s corpse came soon after with what appears to be a gunshot wound on the head. The Police’s earlier statements lean towards an accident that threw the car off Third Mainland Bridge but later they said it must have been a robbery that went wrong. No one can explain the black baton that was wedged in between the steering and the gearbox. Family suspect it had something to do with those paid to serve and protect and want to prosecute. Big Oga wants us on watching brief.
Everyone’s sober.

Ageism

2009-05-19T16:58:00.000+01:00

For those who (still!) don’t know: what counts in law practice is a well-worn wig.
The tattered ones are best and reserved for worship at the legal altar. So, ‘new wig’ in legalese is the synonym for the life beneath the bottom of the pile aka note-taker, bag-carrier and researcher for all the matters no one wants to do. Although, I’m resigned to my young-hood, I‘m thinking of starting a prayer and fast to speed the time that the next set of wigs start to work here.
Hopefully, my prayer will get a laser-time reply, so I get to move one rung up the legal ladder and shed some weight on some unlucky junior.
I admit it - I am as bad as the rest of them.